3 ms·

There's a ton of options. But I'm using this one ... https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B086MK4YB8 https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B086MK4YB8 It also has a S

There's a ton of options. But I'm using this one ... https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B086MK4YB8 https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B086MK4YB8 It also has a SIM slot so you can fallback to LTE if your main internet goes down. I should mention. This doesn't have wifi. I buy distinct access points that are POE powered. For those, i use the WAX-610.

zokier 6y ago
Wifi is the Achilles heel here. For example as far as I can google, that device has quite old Intel Wifi chipset which means 802.11AC only and no AX, firmware blobs, and worst of all apparently no AP mode support on 5GHz(!!!??). So not the best choice as a (wireless) router. That being said, I don't know what Wifi chipset would be really good option right now.
- sliken 6y ago
  Would just handle routing and wifi separately. Ubiquiti has a wifi-6 AP for $99 (2x2) and a "LR" version with 4x4 for $179. Then you can add whatever router you want and not have to worry about what next years wifi standard is.
  - alyandon 6y ago
    Pretty much the route I went when I finally got fed up with brick and mortar store routers - Mikrotik router + Ubiquiti AP.
  - ksec 6y ago
    One thing I never got round to figure out, these AP are still on 1Gbps Ethernet, but the LE WiFi 6 support 2.5Gbps on 5Ghz alone?
    - KozmoNau7 6y ago
      I absolutely see your point and understand the confusion. The thing is that those kinds of speeds are not realistically possible. Ubiquiti claims "2.4Gbps" on 5Ghz in the specs, but it's one of those marketing things, like how TP-Link claims to sell a "11Gbps" router, which is just them adding together all the absolute peak data rates together times how many simultaneous streams it can support. It's marketing nonsense, just like those wall wart-powered PC surround speaker systems that promise "3000 WATTS OF POWER". No client device will ever get near those promised ultimate maximum speeds, because most client hardware is 2x2 streams (two receive, two transmit) or rarely 3x3 for high-end devices. The client is the limiting factor, it doesn't matter if the router is 4x4 or 8x8. If you look at the matrix of possible data rates, 802.11ax can do up to 1.2Gbps per stream, and can obviously use two simultaneous streams, that's where they get the claimed 2.4Gbps figure. But you can only get that bandwidth if you use 160MHz wide channels, which severely cuts down on the number of available channels. If you can detect any other 5Ghz networks from where you want to set up your AP, I would strongly advise against trying to use 160MHz wide channels, and even 80MHz wide channels can be troublesome in apartment buildings. For an enterprise deployment with multiple APs to cover entire floors and buildings, forget it. 40MHz wide channels are the realistic choice in that scenario. That's why Wifi 6E with the additional new 6GHz spectrum is much more interesting than 802.11ax. But let's say you can run 160MHz wide channels with no interference, your client device can support it and you're close enough to the AP so your connection is strong enough to actually get that promised 2.4Gbps PHY speed. It's theoretically possible, at least. Well, then you go ahead and subtract 40% for combined overhead in the wireless communication and protocols. That puts us at 1.4Gbps throughput. For a single device under 100% optimal conditions. I'm sure Ubiquiti crunched the numbers and figured it wasn't worth it to put 2.5Gbps ports on their APs, especially considering 99.9% of them will be end up plugged into corporate 1Gbps PoE switches. Can you even get reasonably priced 24/48-port 2.5Gbps PoE switches?
maccard 6y ago
That's $450, plus tax plus labour for a wifi setup. It's a really hard sell compared to google mesh wifi pick for anyone other than a die hard fan
- ronnier 6y ago
  There are definitely cheaper ways. But it's a hobby and I enjoy it.
  - maccard 6y ago
    Cant argue with the hobby aspect!

zokier 6y ago

Wifi is the Achilles heel here. For example as far as I can google, that device has quite old Intel Wifi chipset which means 802.11AC only and no AX, firmware blobs, and worst of all apparently no AP mode support on 5GHz(!!!??). So not the best choice as a (wireless) router. That being said, I don't know what Wifi chipset would be really good option right now.

sliken 6y ago
Would just handle routing and wifi separately. Ubiquiti has a wifi-6 AP for $99 (2x2) and a "LR" version with 4x4 for $179. Then you can add whatever router you want and not have to worry about what next years wifi standard is.
- alyandon 6y ago
  Pretty much the route I went when I finally got fed up with brick and mortar store routers - Mikrotik router + Ubiquiti AP.
- ksec 6y ago
  One thing I never got round to figure out, these AP are still on 1Gbps Ethernet, but the LE WiFi 6 support 2.5Gbps on 5Ghz alone?
  - KozmoNau7 6y ago
    I absolutely see your point and understand the confusion. The thing is that those kinds of speeds are not realistically possible. Ubiquiti claims "2.4Gbps" on 5Ghz in the specs, but it's one of those marketing things, like how TP-Link claims to sell a "11Gbps" router, which is just them adding together all the absolute peak data rates together times how many simultaneous streams it can support. It's marketing nonsense, just like those wall wart-powered PC surround speaker systems that promise "3000 WATTS OF POWER". No client device will ever get near those promised ultimate maximum speeds, because most client hardware is 2x2 streams (two receive, two transmit) or rarely 3x3 for high-end devices. The client is the limiting factor, it doesn't matter if the router is 4x4 or 8x8. If you look at the matrix of possible data rates, 802.11ax can do up to 1.2Gbps per stream, and can obviously use two simultaneous streams, that's where they get the claimed 2.4Gbps figure. But you can only get that bandwidth if you use 160MHz wide channels, which severely cuts down on the number of available channels. If you can detect any other 5Ghz networks from where you want to set up your AP, I would strongly advise against trying to use 160MHz wide channels, and even 80MHz wide channels can be troublesome in apartment buildings. For an enterprise deployment with multiple APs to cover entire floors and buildings, forget it. 40MHz wide channels are the realistic choice in that scenario. That's why Wifi 6E with the additional new 6GHz spectrum is much more interesting than 802.11ax. But let's say you can run 160MHz wide channels with no interference, your client device can support it and you're close enough to the AP so your connection is strong enough to actually get that promised 2.4Gbps PHY speed. It's theoretically possible, at least. Well, then you go ahead and subtract 40% for combined overhead in the wireless communication and protocols. That puts us at 1.4Gbps throughput. For a single device under 100% optimal conditions. I'm sure Ubiquiti crunched the numbers and figured it wasn't worth it to put 2.5Gbps ports on their APs, especially considering 99.9% of them will be end up plugged into corporate 1Gbps PoE switches. Can you even get reasonably priced 24/48-port 2.5Gbps PoE switches?

maccard 6y ago

That's $450, plus tax plus labour for a wifi setup. It's a really hard sell compared to google mesh wifi pick for anyone other than a die hard fan

ronnier 6y ago
There are definitely cheaper ways. But it's a hobby and I enjoy it.
- maccard 6y ago
  Cant argue with the hobby aspect!