Question Upgrading my apartment network to 10Gbps Ethernet and WiFi 7 ?

[Snick2040]

I would like to upgrade my apartment's home network to 10Gbps Ethernet with Wi-Fi 7. Even though it’s just an apartment, every band and channel seems to be taken. Fortunately, I already have Ethernet running throughout the apartment. I recently bought a Fluke to test the quality of the Ethernet runs.

All the Ethernet runs terminate in a cabinet in a utility closet. I don’t need Wi-Fi in that location, so I currently have a router there with Wi-Fi disabled. The router connects to two access points located on either end of the apartment and to Ethernet switches placed around the apartment. I’m so grateful for Ethernet because I hate Wi-Fi.

I decided to try out a Netgear Orbi 970 with a satellite. I don’t plan to use the mesh feature (again, I’m not a fan of Wi-Fi). My plan is to move the cable modem to where one of the current access points is located. I’ll replace that AP with the primary Orbi 970 and run a 10Gbps backbone from the Orbi to the utility cabinet. In the cabinet, I’ll install a 10Gbps switch to distribute the connection throughout the apartment, including to the satellite Orbi at the other end of the apartment.

My Questions​

1. Is there a better solution? Are there any alternatives to my current plan that would work more efficiently? Like keeping a non WIFI router in the utility closet.
2. Will this setup introduce noticeable lag? Specifically, would having a 10Gbps switch in the utility cabinet, instead of the main router, cause any noticeable latency from the main 970 to the satellite?
3. Switch Recommendations: Should I use a managed or unmanaged 10Gbps switch in the cabinet? Are there any specific models you’d recommend?
4. Wi-Fi Roaming: I’d like seamless Wi-Fi roaming throughout the apartment. I’m not sure if my current setup supports this anyway or if the 970 would either in the scenario I described.

I know that 10Gbps is overkill, I only have a 1.2Gbps internet connection, but I want to future-proof my network.

Thanks in advance...

 

[bill001g]

The problem with 10gbit is your wires. If you running new you want to use cat6a which is rated to 10gbit at 100 meters. Although not in the official standard it is well known that 10gbit works on cat6 to about 50meters. Since all cable has risen in price so much there is almost no difference in the price of cat6 and cat6a so for new cables you always just go cat6a.

You can also get 10gbit to run even on cat5e at shorter distance. Only cat6a is officially certified but lots of non standard stuff actually works but it is hit and miss. Don't waste money on cat7 or cat8. Cat7 cable was never actually fully certified an cat8 is only used in data centers and almost all the cat8 cable you find being sold is fake cable.

So it seems your design overall is the recommended one.

The path the data must take is.

------cable/fiber modem----router----switch-- (wifi ap and end ethernet devices and even more switches if needed).

Where exactly the equipment is physically located doesn't matter. It can be a challenge sometimes if the ISP connection and modem are not close to the central location where you need to place your switch. You can get very creative and use vlans if you for example do not have 2 physical cables.

This all is going to depend on how the wires in your particular house run but the logical path must follow my crude diagram.

10gbit switches used to be extremely expensive and had all kinds of fancy features. Now days they are actually in the affordable range for most people that want 10gbit in their house. Unmanaged switches are fine. The only feature home uses need on a managed switch would be vlans or PoE stuff.

I have not looked at the specs of cheap 10gbit switches lately. Many years ago you had to worry about the backplane speed. This is the total traffic that can pass a switch. Almost all modern stuff is what is called non blocking or wire speed. What this means is every port can run at full upload and download speed at the same time. So for a 8 port switch the backplane speed would need to be 160gbit. There really is no realistic install where every port would be running at maximum upload and maximum download rate at the same time so a lower number likely isn't going to matter if cost becomes a issue.

There is no such thing as seamless wifi roaming. They like to pretend there is and technically there are wifi roaming standards but most end devices do not support the protocal. The key problem is not the network equipment it is your end device. Unlike a cell phone where the cell tower control the radio in the cell phone on wifi the end device makes all the decisions. They tend to be very stupid because they only have 1 radio chip and can not look for a better signal without disconnecting the current one. They basically use signal level and if the level is ok they will not change to a newer signal even if it is much stronger.

What many of the so called "seamless" roaming mesh systems do is based on what the differnet AP detect the device signal level as they will force disconnect the end device and hope it then picks the better/stronger signal but there is no actual control to what it connects to. This of course is not actually seamless it can take a couple seconds in bad cases to reconnect after a forced disconnect.

The solution that has been done since the start of wifi many years before the marking guys started talking about mesh and seamless roaming was called site survey. You would manaully adjust...ie turn down..the radio signals so you get as little overlap as possible but still have enough signal in the middle area to function. This allows the end device to switch over the the optimum AP....of course it is still not technically seamless since it must recalculate the new encryption keys using the new AP mac address.

 

[Snick2040]

Thank you for your reply.

Im not going to change the ethernet running in the apartment. That would be too expensive. Whatever I get in terms of packet lost and ultimate speed will be what it will be. I'm eager to see what the fluke ethernet tester, arrives today, will tell me about the existing ethernet in the apartment. What I'm trying to figure out is if changing my network's current setup makes sense. Again I have a router with disabled wifi in the utility cabinet with ethernet running out from there specially to two APs and various switches. There is coax cable in every room for a cable modem. So I figured why not just place the cable modem with the main 970 in one of the rooms that has one of the APs. Use the existing ethernet, hoping for 10gig, that runs to the utility closet to share the internet with the rest of the apartment using a 10gig switch. And of course from there replace the other AP across the apartment with the 970s satellite.

With my limited understanding of networking I just thought it was always best to have modem -> router -> access points & switches. Not modem -> router (w/wifi) -> switch -> access point (satellite) & more switches.

Also I don't really care about a mesh network since I have ethernet running throughout the apartment.

Is there better equipment I should be aiming for in this upgrade??

 

[bill001g]

You are correct but the problem is the device you call a "router" is actually hard to get without wifi radios. They of course do exist but because of consumer demand you pay far more for a device that does not have the radio chips in the box rather than just buy a more common box and disable the wifi radios.

Kinda personal preference if you turn the wifi radios off on the main router. It would of course provide better wifi signal to device you use in the same room as the router.

Don't waste your money on any special equipment. You do not even need actual AP just buy a cheap router and run it in AP mode. Again because of supply and demand consumer routers are going to be cheaper. The main feature you pay extra for on a actual AP is the ability to run it on POE. You see ceiling mounted AP where there is no power plug. You also pay lots for for so called "mesh" packages than just buying mulitple cheap routers.

There really is no issue placing the modem/router in a remote room and running the ethernet back to central switch. The problem comes in a special case.

Lets say you have 1 ethernet jack in a room and you have a coax cable for your modem. You want to put the router in the central cabinet.

So you hook the coax to the modem and then modem to the wall jack and then connect that cable to the router WAN port in the central cabinet. You then hook a lan port of the router to your switch and you are good to go. The problem then comes what happens if I want ethernet or a WIFI AP in the same room as the modem. I only have 1 ethernet port and it is being used for the WAN connection. I can not hook more devices to a modem. So without a second ethernet prot that is connected to the lan port of the router coming back to the remote room I can not have what I need. The messy solution for this is to place 2 small managed switches on the cable going to between the remote room and the central cabinet. You run vlans so now you have 2 "virtual" ethernt cables one for wan and a second for lan.

But in your case just run the modem and router in the remote room and connect to a central 10gbit switch.