A simple question (I think :-))

[Henri0001]

Hi all

I hope that you can help me , tried to find the answer by looking at brochures etc. but could not find the answer.

- My objective: have 2 Access Points at home which extend the reach of my current .11n network in a seamless fashion when I move around without ever losing the connection

- My base setup: single wireless .11n router

- What I tried so far:

- power line adapters to build a wired network

- one of the power line adapters has a built-in .11n Access Point

- set the AP to have same SSID / WAP key as the router

- hoped that PC would seamlessly switch from Router to AP seamlessly

- What is the issue:

- yes the PC can switch from one to the other, but first it needs to eg lose the connection from the router, look around, and then connect to the AP

- so I get disconnected for some seconds before connecting again

There has to be a simple solution to this (eg what I experience at the office every day )

Note: from what I read a Wireless Repeater is not a good solution because it halves the bandwidth (and even worse if I were to have 2 of them)

Can you please help me with what would be the simplest solution to this objective?

Thanks very much in advance

Henri

[rocater]

Hello Henri,

Currently in the small business line of wireless we do not have a true seamless roaming solution. This is a feature support by our enterprise devices. More precisely, a wireless LAN controller is needed.

I have seen with several of our APs that when moving from one AP to the other that only 1-2 packets are dropped during the transition. This however is an ideal amount of loss and the normal is in the range of 4+ packet loss.

[Henri0001]

Hi Robert

thanks very much for your advice.

This sounds actually a lot better than what I experienced which was lose connection for several seconds. Am I right in understanding that losing 4+ packets would actually not be noticed by the user and the connection would not appear to be broken?

Henri

[rocater]

The disconnect and reconnect would not be noticed by the user if all they are doing is roaming. However, for applications, streaming and voice, there would be a noticeable effect and could cause problems. It is not recommended for anything that requires a constant connection.

Also this is only a test in a small business enviroment that would be using 1-2 switches. If you have a large network, it could take a considerable time for traffic to be redirected.

For use in a home network with only 2 APs, the impact should be very small.

[Henri0001]

Thanks. Which is the simplest (but performing) equipment/model you would then recommend to get please?

[rocater]

Currently you have a few options. I have found this document which provides a lot of detail between the available models. Also to note, the WAP121 and WAP321 have just been released but are a great addition to our wireless devices.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/prod/collateral/wireless/ps5678/ps10047/at_a_glance_c45-552603-00.pdf

[Henri0001]

Thanks Robert, I get an error message when trying to access the file on the link:

Forbidden File or Application The file or application you are trying to access may require additional entitlement or you are trying to access a file with an invalid name. Additional entitlement levels are granted based on a users relationship with Cisco on a per-application basis.

[rocater]

Sorry about the problem. It appears that it is listed as a partner resource. I went over the key features and I would recommend the WAP121 or WAP321.

The WAP121 has a 10/100 port with small usage in mind.

The WAP321 has a gigabit port and can be used with 2.4ghz or 5ghz channels.

If you are using this for your home connection the WAP121 should be enough.