UKH

I am hoping somebody can clear the fog of mystery around home wifi hotspots for me. 

This is my current set up. Gigaclear fibre optic broadband. I pay for 300mbs speed. The router can transmit wireless signal in two bands (2.5ghz and 5ghz). I hardwire with a cat7 cable into a BT homespot 500 plug which then sends the signal around the home wiring. I have two further wifi hotspots on the ring main around the house. This does work, but I get nothing like the speeds i'm paying for and I am fairly certain it is the BT homespot wifi set up that is pretty old tech.

I do get those speeds when I am connected to the main router via wifi or hardwired, but this does not project the signal very far, so I am 100% certain the BT system is the weak point.

I have looked at the up to date models (homespot 1000) for BT and they get very mixed reviews.

Can anyone suggest a great wifi hotspot set up that I could use to replace the BT one I am using that will give great coverage throughout house and be able to cope with 300mbs speed? I would like a minimum of three wifi hotspots located around the house to get the coverage.

Ideally budget would be less than £200, but will stretch beyond that if I can get something very reliable and bulletproof and future proof.

thx in advance

Have you speed tested using the various links?  I used to have the power supply ethernet plugs and they worked fine in my old house, in the new house the speed was pitiful due to the nature of the copper wiring round the house.  Thankfully plain old wifi extenders do the job.

Speed testing each access method should help you understand where the bottleneck or weak link is.

Good luck

Toby

Consistent 300Mbps speeds throughout a large or awkward house will be a challenge for any purely wireless or powerline-based solution, even fancy ones that cost more than your budget.

The simplest option, but not the cheapest, would be one of the new breed of wireless mesh networking kits. I don't think any of those are very likely to get you a full 300Mbps everywhere but you could probably see a substantial improvement on your current setup. Good group review and recommendations here: https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-wi-fi-mesh-networking-kits/

A faster and potentially cheaper option would be to run Ethernet cable to the positions where you need a signal boost and then you could just use any decent wireless access point. You would want to make sure that the multiple access points weren't overlapping and drowning each other out too much though (by tweaking the channels they use and possibly also their power level, if that's an option in the firmware).

If runs of Ethernet are an option and you're reasonably geeky, I would look at Ubiquiti's range of access points. Lots of powerful features and flexibility but they have a bit of a learning curve if it's not your area of expertise. This style of meshed specialist access points with Ethernet backhaul is definitely the best possible solution, if you can make it happen.

Look at the ubiquiti access points, AC PRO or AC LITE, not enterprise grade but definitely better than most home use stuff, requires a little bit of learning due to them being cloud/controller managed, but nothing difficult

EDIT: Didn't realise the BT stuff was powerline, powerline is very finnicky and unreliable, your best bet is to run some proper solid core cat5e to install a proper AP

I get those sorts of speed in a few rooms by having 3 TP Link EAP-225 access points ceiling mounted at specific points.  They’re all power over Ethernet from a suitable gigabit switch.  They’re low end enterprise gear rather than domestic but it’s not hard to figure them out.  The directional unit I have has a built in spectrum analyser mode which is useful for spotting the best channel to use.

I struggle to get > 60 mbps from the segment to an outbuilding on powerline Ethernet.  Power line isn’t great especially with cheap switch mode power supplies in some LED lighting units sending all sorts of high frequency crap into your circuits.   I’ve been thinking about putting an inline filter in the distribution board before our lighting circuits...

Have a look at the BT Whole Home set up. We have a long narrow house, with the telephone input at one end, and the kid's (teenager and 11) bedrooms at the other. We were using the homespot wifi, and it simply couldn't cope with the modern day teenagers wifi usage, and kept dropping out. I eventually got fed up of the complaints and switched to Whole Home (£150 for 3 discs) and the problem was solved.

the idea is one disc connects to your router (need not be BT), and this connects with the other discs t create a wifi network. You then stop your router broadcasting, and get all devices to forget old wifi network. everything connects to this new network. the only issue I found was that I had to switch the original 2.5ghz network back on, as wired in devices (alexa-enable light bulbs in the kids rooms) needed that.

What I like is you can see the signal strength for each disc, and things like phones switch seamlessly from disc to disc as you move around. You can also play around - create groups of devices (sons phone, tablet and xbox for example) and then pause the wifi for that group, or pause the whole house. I only had to carry that threat out once and they got I had the power! You can also see all devices connected at any one time.

We have google WiFi mesh routers. They were about £90 each but they provide one seamless network ID across the whole house at high speed (competitive with the >100Mbps that we get wired). All the device switching between access points happens smoothly and the management interface is also very nice.

Edit: didn't see that you'd be transferring the signal between the routers over a powerline. We have cat 5 between the routers that we put in when the floors were up for something else so couldn't comment on how nicely they'd play with powerline adapters. The routers do claim to be able to extend the network via wifi as long as they are within range of each other and reviews were favourable for this mode of operation when we looked.

Not knowing the layout of your home its difficult to advise, although the best bet is a couple of cabled in access points. Look at Unifi Access point and the 60w gigabit switch, for a superb system. Fairly easy to setup and maintain.

There are a host of mesh systems out there as well, Google, BT or Ubiquiti have the Cube AC's which have a mesh system, although they're not exactly plug and play!

In a similar situation I went mesh (an Orbi RBR50 and satellite). 

You can use your existing cabling from the router to the satellite for backhaul duty, so all "back to base" traffic goes via wire, and base to satellite via wireless.

We have a (very) big old house (>500m2) and previous owners covered the weatherboards with chicken wire and then pebbledash, bless them. Then put an extension on - and that's where the fibre comes in. So basically for every other room I'm on the other side of a Faraday cage, so really difficult to get even modest speeds using an Apple Airport ac/n router plus extenders.

House (and indeed most of the garden) now get 500Mbs down and 300 up. No bank spots, and devices are handed off as they move around the house. I also got rid of the (Vodafone) supplied modem/router completely, which was a bonus, as the Orbi does all the required work from the ONT. Both base and satellite also include 3 port gigabit ethernet ports which "appear" to be wired connections.

It is more than budgeted at 299 though. https://www.tomsguide.com/us/netgear-orbi,review-4263.html

 I'd say mesh is probably the best way forward, the only issue really being proprietary protocols make them non-interchangeable. Oh, and the Google ones do exactly what you would expect with your data....

b

I don't think he has any existing cabling to his secondary access point. He was using powerline, which is unlikely to get him the speeds he wants.

Does it really split the upstream and downstream traffic between wired and wireless? Surely when it has wired backhaul available, it uses that in both directions. That's the only way you'd be getting such high performance throughout your house. You wouldn't get real-world 500Mbps down or 300Mbps up from a multi-hop wireless connection.

Or is your second use of "satellite" referring to clients?

One more thing.  Don’t write off running dedicated, wired Ethernet between wireless access points.  Have a look at flat Ethernet cables - these can be run under carpets and doors making it easier to run largely invisible cabling without smashing walls and ceilings up.   

Thx for all the replies. Am now considering a TP Link Deco M5 mesh set up. Its under £200 on amazon.

I am assuming that if the first one is hardwired into the router, then it should be able to broadcast close to 300mbs and the other two discs will push out similar internet speeds. Is this reasonable?

This appeals because I am not at all tech savvy and would like something simple to set up.

Probably not, in practice. If you want a decent chance of getting full internet speeds from the satellite access points, you'll need them wired to the base station. Especially as the system you're looking at uses the same radios and frequencies for backhaul as for clients. There's no dedicated wireless backhaul so communication with the satellite access points will be competing with communication with clients.

You might still see improvements over your current system anyway, so you could install them wirelessly to see how it goes and then add Ethernet cabling later if you're not satisfied.

Whatever you do, make sure you also turn off the WiFi on your original router to avoid interference.

"uses the same radios and frequencies for backhaul as for clients. There's no dedicated wireless backhaul so communication with the satellite access points will be competing with communication with clients."

Apologies, but what does this mean? Who are the clients and what does backhaul mean in this context?

Also, if the first in line gives out close to 300mbps and the next only manages 200mbps, and the third (furthest away) 125mbps (for example) I would be pretty happy with that. Is that degradation of speed likely across the three discs or could it be worse if they are not hardwired to the router ?(I would turn off the routers own wifi signal as you suggest)

Sorry. I was using clients to refer to phones/laptops etc. connecting to the access points. Backhaul referred to communication between the router and the access points.

Some mesh network hardware reserves a specific set of radios for this backhaul communication between the meshed access points. That means that communication with clients isn't slowing down communication between the access points and vice versa.

So many variables that it's very difficult to say. It certainly could be worse than that under some circumstances, under others those might be reasonable expectations.

Best-case scenario for the physical setup would be that the access points aren't too far from the base station, there's very little loss of signal due to intervening walls and there's minimal interference from nearby networks. Of course, if all of that was the case then you wouldn't need multiple access points in the first place!

On top of that, the usage you're putting it to will have an effect. Best case scenario for speeds to a client would be a single client, close to its access point with traffic largely flowing in one direction (e.g. a single large download). As soon as you have multiple clients competing for airtime, as well as data flowing both up and downstream, you'll lower your effective speeds.

I intended to ask, will both satellite access points be within range to communicate with the base station, or will the most distant access point be connected to the base station indirectly via the intermediate access point? The latter is something of a worst case scenario and will really tax your chosen kit. The test results on Wirecutter suggest that you'll get nowhere near the values you're hoping for under those circumstances.

https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/best-wi-fi-mesh-networking-kits/#an-overv...

Thx for explanation. My router is placed at the far end of my house which is timber frame so pathetically thin, drafty, crumbling plaster walls

I have no idea how far the deco M5 will throw the wifi signal but there is a good chance the other two discs would be in range of the first one if it can extend 10 metres through those walls.

As far as what will be connected to the wifi... three smart tv's, an imac , a few Sonos speakers and two mobile phones, but in reality never all at the same time. Usage is mainly for internet and tv, no heavy loads at all.

Might be worth considering whether you could get your phone line moved or extended into the middle of the house. You might then get away with a single good access point and if not, you might still get better performance with a mesh. Then again, if that was an easy option then runs of Ethernet would also be on the cards.

If sticking with the mesh kit, with access points in three positions some of them should be pretty close to some of your fixed devices. Any devices that you can connect to an access point with an Ethernet cable will reduce the traffic over wireless and improve performance for the other devices that have to be stuck on wireless.

Thx, good advice. Reading that article I think I will avoid the TP Link deco system. I can certainly attach the imac to the router via ethernet cable, and if I am going to fit that lead, then I can connect the first access point there as well which is slightly further inside the house, then I might be able to get away with just one more access point. 

If that's an option, you could also consider getting a longer cable for connecting your router to the telephone socket and move the main router to that more central location.

Sorry, I misconstrued the cat 7 cable comment from the OP.

My Orbi setup has no wired backhaul, so is wifi only. From my iPhone upstairs (at the opposite side of the building to the ONT) I get 399-496 down, and 153-259 up . Downstairs is faster (a 2.5Gb download of OSX 10.14.4 yesterday over wifi to a 2012 Mac Mini took 40 seconds!).

I'm no network engineer (I hadn't even realised Cat 7 was a thing) but for me the advantage of the Orbi was that I could set it up easily and it has been very stable. The only tricky bit was getting the settings right for vodafone (my ISP) when I stripped the ISP provided modem out and just let the Orbi cover modem and router duties, and that was easy enough to do online.

Have a read of the review linked above  https://www.tomsguide.com/us/netgear-orbi,review-4263.html for a more technical description of the Orbi topology - I don't need a third satellite so have no idea if the update for true mesh vs hub/spoke upgrade has been released or not.   

Hope that helps. It sounds like the OP and my requirements are very similar - a couple of laptops, 4 mobiles coming and going, 3 Sonos devices, and a few wired things (AppleTV etc)- generally 16-20 devices once the NAS is added in etc. So I'm happy to make the recommendation based on personal experience. In particular the amount of IT support calls from the wife and kids has fallen off a cliff since the mesh network went in...

Cheers

b

Hi Ben,

Does the Netgear Orbi system have to have a Orbi router? I looked on Amazon and it seems they all come with a router supplied. Could it work with my existing router (Genexis fibre optic router)? 

Yes, you'll need an Orbi router. The way that Orbi routers communicate wirelessly with the satellites is proprietary.

Great, spoke to my ISP and they said I can convert router to just a modem and pass through to Orbi router so that would work.  I am assuming the RBK23 is more than enough for my purposes and the RBK53 would be overkill?

No

Yes

I think we are getting trapped in the terminology a bit. Basically you need two different things to happen: 1) convert the fibre optic signal into “the internet” (!) and 2) handle creating your local WiFi network so that your devices can connect without clashing or losing each other (all the address stuff) 

the box provided by your ISP obviously does (1) well but (2) not well enough. 

So you can either turn off the WiFi section of your ISPs box and then run a cable from it to your new Orbi, or let the Orbi do both. I did the latter and got bonus points for replacing the pig ugly box supplied with the Orbi, and saved a power point too!

You will need to talk to your ISP again about the settings, or search around online if you go for the latter. This was not too tricky for me in a small country so I guess in the UK it should be straightforward. Who is your ISP?

Cheers

b

I think you're getting routers and base stations confused. Mesh systems as yet don't conform to a universal standard, so you are right that can only use Eeros satellites with Eeros bases, Orbis with Orbis etc. within a given mesh network. But the router doesn't have to be part of the wifi network if set to bridge mode.

b

No, I was just answering the question he asked in the language he asked it in, which wasn't incorrect anyway. I'm not sure why you think I'm confused. Are you saying that it's incorrect to refer to the Orbi base station as a router? I don't think it is and Orbi themselves use that language to describe it. I don't mind calling it a base station either. Both seem like valid descriptions and like a lot of home networking gear, most of these boxes actually fill multiple roles.

As I interpreted the question, he wanted to know whether he could buy Orbi satellites without an Orbi base station and form a mesh network using his ISP's router as the base station. The answer that I gave him was that he can't do that and he seems to have understood that answer perfectly well because his response of finding out how to put his ISP's router into bridge mode is entirely correct and probably the easiest solution to the problem. I don't know about his ISP in particular but some of them can get quite funny about letting customers use their own modems and refuse to give out the necessary settings.

Nevertheless, your advice about bypassing the ISP's router altogether is a useful addition and worth considering. I just don't see what makes you think my advice was wrong.

I see where you are coming from - we have interpreted the same question in different ways. I was just trying to ensure the OP didn't think he needed to buy a new Netgear router as well as the (expensive) Orbi system. 

I think you probably know a lot more about networks than I do. I do have the advantage of familiarity over this specific setup though, 'cos it is what I run  

This means I'm happy to say the satellite runs a separate wifi channel backhaul, and provides 2 channels, one at 173Mbps and at 866Mbps that can be accessed by devices. The wifi backhaul runs at a not too shabby 1733Mbps. This means that the performance of the satellite is only marginally lower than the base, in practice.

HTH

b

Thx guys, my ISP is gigaclear and I spoke to them and they said a lot of customers have added Orbi and google mesh systems to their Genexis modem/router and that they are happy to give me the instructions to turn it into bridge mode, so all good there.

My last question to Ben B is which orbi system do you have RBK23 or RBK53? Is the 53 overkill, or is it worth it for future proofing? My ISP can provide 1000mbps but I currently only pay for 300mbps as this seems more than fast enough for now.

Cheers

I’m not sure as to the size of your house, so difficult to know. But unless it’s a lead lined mansion I’d go for the smaller one. 

We have a very large, old, dilapidated house with very poor WiFi characteristics (for many years we had 4 access points to get even poor coverage upstairs and even then not all the rooms). Now I have fast coverage still if I’m round at the neighbours. That’s with the RBR50 - I suspect overkill. 

Good luck and feel free to pm me if you have questions not covered by the ISP. 

Cheers

b

The main sacrifices of the cheaper device are:

No USB port, so you can't plug in a hard drive or printer to be shared across the network. Not an issue unless that's something you're likely to want.

Fewer Ethernet ports on router and satellites. Not an issue if you're mostly using wireless, could be a limiting factor if you'd like to upgrade to some wired connections now or in the future.

Slightly reduced range/coverage. Probably not an issue unless your house is really massive or awkward.

Reduced headline wireless speeds. Most of the speed advantages of the more expensive router will only really come into play if you're making heavy use of the network with multiple devices at once. That doesn't sound like something you're going to do.

To be fair the USB on the back of the RBR50 is as much use as a chocolate teapot anyway. I'm not sure I ever got a printer to work on it (tried a Canon and a Dell to no avail).

b