I know you will ask why not go for a tri-band option? And you’re right, it’s the best way to ensure that the bandwidth does not get affected by the backhaul traffic, so the second node can broadcast a powerful and reliable WiFi signal. And what’s interesting is the seamless transition between the nodes because even when I was in a conference call, I did not see any dropped frames, but I will test it soon with iperf to get a better idea on whether there are some dropped packets when moving between nodes or if the handshake is truly seamless. I had an Asus RT-AX82U as the main unit and the RT-AX88U as the secondary unit, and, as you may expect, both covered the entire office nicely with WiFi, without any noticeable issues. Even the older ones that were released way before the Asus-made mesh system called AiMesh was released. Although not that much because I simply like their interface more than on other routers, but there’s also the support for a large variety of devices.
The simple answer is because I already had one other Asus router, but the reasoning goes a bit deeper than that.
And there are various options available on the market, from dual-band to tri-band systems, those with identical units, separate types of routers that can be used in a mesh network and more. Ideally, the units should use a dedicated band for the inter-node connection and leave the other/s to the client devices. One main unit gets connected to the Internet and the others get scattered around the house, while still communicating wirelessly. Still, the core concept remains the same. I think it’s been six years since I tested the Eero mesh system (still sad about its acquisition by Amazon) and since then, there have been numerous advancements in tech, most notably being the transition to the newer WiFi 6 standard. So, naturally, I decided to use a mesh WiFi system and create a seamless single network by relying on multiple mesh nodes. This means that it’s less reliable in longer distances and it won’t do that great radiating through objects. I said 2.4GHz because the 5GHz usually has a hard time going through walls and it’s far more prone to interference. Like I said, I now work in an older building and there are two areas separated by a huge concrete wall which does not let the WiFi signal pass through, unless you sit right next to the wall and decide to rely on the 2.4GHz network. Use a mesh network to boost the WiFi signal through walls Use a powerline adapter to get Internet in difficult-to-reach areasġ. Use a wireless access point to boost the WiFi signal That being said, let’s explore some of the available options. Yes, newer homes can be configured any way you want them, so you could create circuits for powerline adapters, although why not simply use Ethernet cables? And yes, the cables, be it Ethernet or fiber optics, they do remain the most reliable ways to have Internet anywhere in your home. The latter has been growing in popularity and rightfully so since it’s a reliable option, but only if the electrical wiring was designed with them in mind from the beginning. I am talking about WiFi extenders which are usually terrible, but do provide some relief in areas where the WiFi simply does not want to reach and then there’s also the powerline adapter. There are also some very unstable ways to boost the WiFi signal through walls and, unfortunately, these are the most popular ways that people (want to) do it. I have recently moved to a new office and it’s an older building with concrete walls and, since, naturally, the WiFi refused to cover the entire space, it made me wonder how can one boost the WiFi signal through walls? There are a few ways to easily do it, from using a mesh system which would hopefully inter-connect over a longer distance and not use up the entire bandwidth with the backhaul traffic to the far more reliable wired access point.
0 kommentar(er)
