04-23-2012 09:48 AM
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
04-23-2012 10:25 AM
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.
04-23-2012 10:58 AM
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?
04-23-2012 11:35 AM
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.
04-23-2012 12:45 PM
Thanks. Which is the simplest (but performing) equipment/model you would then recommend to get please?
04-24-2012 06:59 AM
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.
04-24-2012 09:25 AM
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.
04-24-2012 09:41 AM
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.
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: