3 ms·

That's like, your opinion man. With 802.11ac on 5GHz, on a mac laptop, I consistently get about 800-1100Mbps. That is gigabit speed. And it's everywhere in the

by 4ad 9y ago

That's like, your opinion man. With 802.11ac on 5GHz, on a mac laptop, I consistently get about 800-1100Mbps. That is gigabit speed. And it's everywhere in the house and yard because I have the appropriate number of APs configured with the right signal power and antenna gain. I have no need for cables anymore on my laptops in any situation where I need speed, and there are many such situations. All my files at home are on a network share. No problem, wifi is fast. I feel people have only used badly configured crappy consumer APs on crappy laptops (without MIMO) and don't understand that wifi doesn't have to be slow and unreliable.

tjoff 9y ago
I feel that you are sugar coating it a tad bit much... "A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks": https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/802-eleventy-what-a-deep-dive-into-why-wi-fi-kind-of-sucks/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/802-e...
- devwastaken 9y ago
  72 MB, which isn't the real world speed, as stated, isn't a lot. Thats only 9 actual megabytes a second. Now download any sizable source code project, or, upload many small changes. Or, even just a movie from itunes or something. Good routers can go over 100Mbps, easily, and I would never think that 'less' speed is 'okay' in a world where increased speeds are just a requirement of technology over time, and usage, of said technology.
sgt 9y ago
When I can, I use a cable (and an adapter so I can use Ethernet with my MBP). I've achieved up to 100Mbps on Wi-Fi at home but the problem has always been variable latency. Any kind of interfere from the dozens of other Wi-Fi networks in the area seems to have an effect, so I always plug in if I can.
- 4ad 9y ago
  > I've achieved up to 100Mbps on Wi-Fi at home Note that I said 800-1100Mbps. > but the problem has always been variable latency Symptom of crappy consumer equipment. > Any kind of interfere from the dozens of other Wi-Fi networks in the area seems to have an effect Well yeah, that is why I use 5GHz which doesn't penetrate walls very well so I don't get any interference.
glasz 9y ago
i'm interested in your setup. are you using macos or another bsd? what kind of ap's do you use? what does your mesh look like? special antennas? thank you.
- 4ad 9y ago
  My setup is actually very simple. Actually I have several setups in multiple locations. I use Mikrotik[1] APs managed by Mikrotik controller (so centralized management for all APs). Look for the ones that support dual-concurrent tripple-chain 802.11ac like hAP ac or wAP ac. I use 5GHz everywhere although I do have 2.4GHz also. There is no interference on the 5GHz band as it doesn't penetrate walls (YMMV). I use a lot of APs, usually one AP per room if I want 5GHz coverage in that room. The power used is very low. More power just means more interference. The bottleneck is the transmit power on the client, which is very low. More power on the AP just make everything louder. I've set up power level based on this document: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203068 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203068. Unfortunately only Apple documents this stuff, but works pretty well for everything AFAICT. I don't have any special antennas. If you need to cover a large space with a single AP you might need one, but the best philosophy on 5GHz is to have many smaller APs. All my APs are connected through ethernet (actually everything is PoE powered). I don't use any mesh stuff (although Mikrotik can be used in that configuration, I don't recommend it). All my APs are simple bridges, I don't use the Mikrotik tunnel stuff. I don't use 802.11r because Mikrotik can't do it yet. I am not sure if anyone except Cisco can do it. I wish I had 802.11r, this is my Achilles' heel. Everything works very well, but you get what you pay for. Mikrotik is really cheap compared to the real stuff out there, which means much less polish, more bugs, and no real documentation. If I were to do it again I might chose Unifi[2] instead. Don't get me wrong, this all works very well, but the level of polish is what you'd expect out of a GitHub project compared to some real commercial product. For example while you can set antenna gain in standalone AP mode, you can't do it in managed AP mode. Minor stuff like that. I also run a RADIUS server and I create user accounts for all my wireless users (WPA2 Enterprise). At different locations users have the same credentials. I use all kinds of clients (Linux/BSD/macOS), but the ones where I'm most interested in speed are the Macbooks. [1] https://routerboard.com https://routerboard.com [2] https://unifi-hd.ubnt.com https://unifi-hd.ubnt.com
pinpeliponni 9y ago
I am running virtual machines with iSCSI storage over 802.11an... It's fast enough even for that. (Well, there's latency, but good enough for my development boxes.)

by 4ad 9y ago

tjoff 9y ago

I feel that you are sugar coating it a tad bit much... "A deep dive into why Wi-Fi kind of sucks": https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/802-eleventy-what-a-deep-dive-into-why-wi-fi-kind-of-sucks/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/03/802-e...

devwastaken 9y ago
72 MB, which isn't the real world speed, as stated, isn't a lot. Thats only 9 actual megabytes a second. Now download any sizable source code project, or, upload many small changes. Or, even just a movie from itunes or something. Good routers can go over 100Mbps, easily, and I would never think that 'less' speed is 'okay' in a world where increased speeds are just a requirement of technology over time, and usage, of said technology.

sgt 9y ago

When I can, I use a cable (and an adapter so I can use Ethernet with my MBP). I've achieved up to 100Mbps on Wi-Fi at home but the problem has always been variable latency. Any kind of interfere from the dozens of other Wi-Fi networks in the area seems to have an effect, so I always plug in if I can.

4ad 9y ago
> I've achieved up to 100Mbps on Wi-Fi at home Note that I said 800-1100Mbps. > but the problem has always been variable latency Symptom of crappy consumer equipment. > Any kind of interfere from the dozens of other Wi-Fi networks in the area seems to have an effect Well yeah, that is why I use 5GHz which doesn't penetrate walls very well so I don't get any interference.

glasz 9y ago

i'm interested in your setup. are you using macos or another bsd? what kind of ap's do you use? what does your mesh look like? special antennas? thank you.

4ad 9y ago
My setup is actually very simple. Actually I have several setups in multiple locations. I use Mikrotik[1] APs managed by Mikrotik controller (so centralized management for all APs). Look for the ones that support dual-concurrent tripple-chain 802.11ac like hAP ac or wAP ac. I use 5GHz everywhere although I do have 2.4GHz also. There is no interference on the 5GHz band as it doesn't penetrate walls (YMMV). I use a lot of APs, usually one AP per room if I want 5GHz coverage in that room. The power used is very low. More power just means more interference. The bottleneck is the transmit power on the client, which is very low. More power on the AP just make everything louder. I've set up power level based on this document: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203068 https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT203068. Unfortunately only Apple documents this stuff, but works pretty well for everything AFAICT. I don't have any special antennas. If you need to cover a large space with a single AP you might need one, but the best philosophy on 5GHz is to have many smaller APs. All my APs are connected through ethernet (actually everything is PoE powered). I don't use any mesh stuff (although Mikrotik can be used in that configuration, I don't recommend it). All my APs are simple bridges, I don't use the Mikrotik tunnel stuff. I don't use 802.11r because Mikrotik can't do it yet. I am not sure if anyone except Cisco can do it. I wish I had 802.11r, this is my Achilles' heel. Everything works very well, but you get what you pay for. Mikrotik is really cheap compared to the real stuff out there, which means much less polish, more bugs, and no real documentation. If I were to do it again I might chose Unifi[2] instead. Don't get me wrong, this all works very well, but the level of polish is what you'd expect out of a GitHub project compared to some real commercial product. For example while you can set antenna gain in standalone AP mode, you can't do it in managed AP mode. Minor stuff like that. I also run a RADIUS server and I create user accounts for all my wireless users (WPA2 Enterprise). At different locations users have the same credentials. I use all kinds of clients (Linux/BSD/macOS), but the ones where I'm most interested in speed are the Macbooks. [1] https://routerboard.com https://routerboard.com [2] https://unifi-hd.ubnt.com https://unifi-hd.ubnt.com

pinpeliponni 9y ago

I am running virtual machines with iSCSI storage over 802.11an... It's fast enough even for that. (Well, there's latency, but good enough for my development boxes.)