Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your de

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:23:49 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton wrote:

I have a single WiFi router that reaches all over my house and a little
bit outside. It really is all I need to access the Internet from my
tablet while I'm sitting on the sofa or out on the deck.

Hi Cindy Hamilton,

If you already get good signal to and from anywhere you need to, with a
typical cable modem and SOHO router, then you have absolutely no need for
the technical acumen and powerful tools that this thread espouses.

Out here, where I live, above the Silicon Valley, just to give you an idea
of the distances involved, we have 40 acre zoning, which means you can't
even build a second house if you have only 79 acres of land.

Yet, we can 'see' millions of access points (literally and figuratively),
which means, if we wanted to, we can have a friend many miles away connect
his desktop to our cable modem (if we had a cable modem - which is
essentially what our "radio" is so it's the same thing in effect).

More to the point, if I want to beam my signal from my desktop to the pool,
which is only a few hundred feet away, I can, and if I want to reach the
driveway gate, which is also hundreds of feet from the house, I can.

Likewise with the barn, shed, shop, and parking area.
o All I need is an RJ45 port (on any router, modem, laptop, or desktop).

What's even better, is our houses are rather large, where we can easily
beam to all corners of the house from OUTSIDE the house.

All we do is connect a Cat5 cable to what you'd call a "cable modem", and
then we can beam the cable modem Internet signal back into the house.

Since the signal is penetrating a structure, it won't go for miles in that
case, but it's certainly powerful enough to penetrate to all floors and all
corners of the house.

I can't be the only person on this newsgroup who would like that kind of
power at about the same costs as what people are paying today for
"repeaters" and "wifi dongles" for their laptops and desktops.

In summary, you don't need anything whatsoever by way of power & distance
o And that's fine - as it's a very useful datapoint which we appreciate

Hopefully other people enjoy having this kind of power at the same cost.

--
Admittedly, the wifi dongles are tiny compared to this setup!

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:25:16 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton wrote:

And only a loon would define wifi access at your home as meaning you
have to put in eqpt at some 'friend's house' kilometers away to make
it possible. I'm with you, there are various wifi hotspots in the
area around here, but none that I can pick up at my home.

I don't use WiFi hotspots. You never know where they've been.

While it's normal for Trader to misunderstand even the most basic of things
o In general, most users on this newsgroup comprehend what Ethernet is

With this setup, at about the same cost as any normal SOHO router
o You can feed your entire house with signal many times more powerful

If you don't _need_ WiFi transmit power ... these tools aren't for you.
o But some on this ng need to transmit to the edge of their property line.

And to all corners and all floors of their house.
o At about the same cost as they're paying today (needing more shelf space)

--
In addition, you "can" connect to APs miles away (if you want to).

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 19:44:07 -0000 (UTC), William Unruh wrote:

The cost on the Microtik web site is about fifty dollars:
https://mikrotik.com/product/RB411

Unfortunately all the products on that web site are discontinued.

Thanks for pointing that out, where almost all my equipment is free, since
people replace their routers and antennas all the time, with new ones. as
specs changed from g, to n, to ac, etc. over the years.

A quick search shows the 23dBm routerboard FCC-ID is TV7R52N, dated to 2009
<https://fccid.io/TV7R52N>

So it's likely nearly ten years old, which was before ac routers existed.
o Where everyone should be familiar that WiFi standards changed over time.

I think I already posted the $90 ac equivalent on Amazon, where I'm sure
far better prices can be found if we look a little further on the net.
<https://www.amazon.com/MikroTik-RB911G-5HPacD-RouterBoard-911G-5HPacD/dp/B00UH8VWVQ>

Notice that, for about the same cost as any typical 15-20 decibel router,
you get a 5GHz 802.11ac router with a 720MHz CPU with 128MB DDR2 onboard
memory & Ethernet One Gigabit port with Auto-MDI/X Wireless QCA9882, 2x
MMCX connectors, Dual chains, which works anywhere in the world (Mikrotik
is renown for allowing settings for ANY country, where last I checked on
mine, there were literally about 200 different country choices in the
firmware).

The good news from your post is that I am aware you are rather well
educated in Physics, so I'm sure you're appreciative of the phenomenal
power of decibels, where, a quick look just now on one of my routers shows
the EIRP to be around 27 dBM plus around 10 dBi, which gives me roughly
about 37 decibels of transmit power.
<https://i.postimg.cc/DZccY2YD/decibels.jpg>

Most people might not need such huge power (which equates to signal
strength at distance, of course), where the key educational technical point
is that this inexpensive equipment costs just about as much as the puny
SOHO routers people put in their homes - where the size of this 23dBm
router connected directly to my desktop computer is actually much SMALLER
than a typical SOHO router (although we need to attach antennas to it, but
they can be of almost any size depending on your distance needs).

In summary, for about the same cost and size of a typical SOHO router, you
can get, literally, miles of distance between your modem or computer, and
the access point.

You just need to know first, that it can be done rather easily, and,
o Then you simply need to know what equipment to purchase on Amazon

--
You will NOT likely find this kind of equipment at a local store.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 19:39:06 -0400, Ken Hart wrote:

When Mr Purgert brought up the Ubiquiti device, it all became clear to
me, especially since my 'backup' ISP uses similar equipment- don't know
if it's Ubiquiti brand, and I don't really want to climb up on my roof
to find out!'

Hi Ken Hart,

Thanks for that purposefully helpful information, as Usenet is a potluck
where each of us brings what value we can share with the other members.

While I've repeatedly stated the cost of this powerful equipment is
essentially about what people already pay for their SOHO routers and their
repeaters, what I didn't say is that the equipment isn't generally to be
found in your basic "box" stores (e.g., Best Buy, Target, Walmart, Costco,
Home Depot, Frys, etc.).

Regarding the brands you seek, in my experience, two brands stand out:
o Ubiquiti <https://www.ui.com>
* Mikrotik <https://mikrotik.com>

While they're large corporations that produce many devices, in general
o Ubiquiti supplies low-cost well-made stand-alone complete units
o Mikrotik supplies even-lower-cost boards where you assemble it yourself

That's why you'll see my Ubiquiti equipment looks like this:
<https://i.postimg.cc/YqTk0q1T/ap.jpg>

While my Mikrotick equipment looks like this:
<https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg>

> (My primary ISP is DSL via the local telco.)

The good news is that the techniques and equipment described in this
thread, work with ANY typical Ethernet connection, such as the ports in the
back of your DSL or cable modem, and your home router, and your laptop or
desktop PC Ethernet port.

That's the beauty of knowing how to use the tools described here
o They work in all common situations (you just need more shelf space)

My technical background is commercial broadcast engineering rather
Wireless ISP, so the word "antenna" has a more narrow meaning to me, and
it's not something with an RJ-45 connector, hence my confusion.

I agree with you that the use of "antenna" to mean "transceiver + antenna"
is a colloquial use of the word, as is the use of "radio" or "router", and
even as is the use of "modem", where all are, for our purposes, essentially
the same thing.

We have a signal and a means to transmit that signal for miles (LOS).
o At just about the same cost as everyone here spends for their home router

But where the home router would be hard pressed to output 20 decibels
o And where we can easily transmit up to the legal limit around the world

Where every 3 decibels is twice the power - so that's a LOT of power
o Which is why any desktop can connect to an AP which is miles away

You just have to know what we've described in this thread to do it.

> Thank you for your explanation and clarification.

I am always happy to share knowledge, as I feel Usenet is a potluck where
adults share among themselves items of useful value to everyone.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:12:36 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 wrote:

It uses packets, but it's not Ethernet, the physical layer and lower
protocol layers are totally different. Ethernet is defined on wires.

Wrong again
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/wireless-products/wireless-ethernet-lan-faq.html

Just because some new hire at Intel got it wrong, does not make it so.
Notice that even there, aside from the title, they don't call Wi-Fi
Ethernet. The relevant LAN standards are controlled by the IEEE
under 802.X:

Hi Cindy & Trader,
Take a look at this photo of an outside antenna I just snapped for you:
<https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>

Notice things about this setup (which costs what your stuff does):
o One end is typical Ethernet (which plugs into anything you've got)
o The other end is typical Wi-Fi (which works with whatever you have)

The fact is that this is ten to one hundred times the power you have
o At about the same price

You just have to understand this fact
o And then you have to have a need for that kind of power

What I find rather illuminating, given Usenet is a public potluck, is when
people like trader repeatedly show up to the public potluck, but they
always seem to bring absolutely nothing of any value to the table, while at
the same time, those people like trader brazenly deny that any of the food
that anyone else brought "tastes good" to him.

Meanwhile, the fact is that one end of these devices plugs into anything
that each of us has at home that naturally takes the RJ45 plug (whether or
not trader accepts that it's called "Ethernet" colloquially when we do
that).

Despite trader always trying to dispute even the most obvious of facts,
another basic fact is that the other end of these devices, is an antenna,
which has a motherboard attached which transmits at WiFi frequencies and
protocols (aka 802.11 a, b, g, n, ac, etc.).

FACT:
o These devices can cost about as much as your current equipment costs
o These devices are easily more than ten times more powerful though
o In general, these devices are a bit larger (not in all cases though)

While there are people like Cindy who don't need this power, there may well
be others who can make use of these tools to gain this 10X power
differential, at no greater cost than what they paid for the 10X weaker
SOHO routers they use today.

Additionally, while there are people like Gavin and Frank who use Cat5
cable to connect to devices, there are cases where that's infeasible, which
is when beaming your own signal to the far corners of your property from
your "modem" back into the house or to the pool or to the driveway entrance
gate, is feasible for some people.

Heck, some of your kids have tree forts, don't they? (I've always lived in
rural areas where tree forts were the norm for the neighborhood boys.)
Wouldn't it be nice to paint your kids' tree forts with Internet?

Here's a picture of just one of my antennas, this one being only about 15d
Bi or so, with a Ubiquiti Bullet of about 27dBm or so attached to it.
<https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>

Since I'm trying to help others pick their equipment, here are current
prices, where you can see this costs as little as your typical router:
<https://www.ispsupplies.com/Ubiquiti-Bullet-M2HP>
<https://www.amazon.com/Ubiquiti-BULLET-M2-HP-Outdoor-802-11-M2HP/dp/B002SYS22E>

Given 600 milliwatts is about 27 decibels, notice you already have about
ten times the power of your typical home router BEFORE you add an antenna!
<https://www.rapidtables.com/convert/power/mW_to_dBm.html>

You can get ten times ten times the power of your router
o When you add an inexpensive antenna to the radio

Bear in mind what I've been trying to get people like trader to understand
o One end is Ethernet (which connects to anything you've got that's RJ45)
o The other end is WiFi (which connects to anything you've got that's WiFi)

Notice you easily get from 10 times to 100 times (or more) the power...
o All at "about the same price" as you're paying now for your equipment

If you know how and if you know what to buy
o You can connect almost anything you have now in your home
o To almost anywhere else (if you can "see" the other side)
o Or, if it's within a few hundred feet, even if you can't see it

This is basic computer, Ethernet, & WiFi stuff.

The datasheet on that $80 bullet transceiver (aka "radio") shows the point
that one end is a connection to any desired antenna, while the other end is
the same typical Ethernet connection that we all have all over the place:
o Atheros MIPS 24KC, 400MHz, 32MB SDRAM, 8MB Flash
o Networking Interface 1 X 10/100 BASE-TX (Cat. 5, RJ-45) Ethernet
o 2.4GHz, 5GHz, 802.11 b,g,n
<https://www.ispsupplies.com/core/media/media.nl?id=944028&c=393682&h=f2a5cdc8f246f497555a>

Despite the fact there are people like trader who don't comprehend even
this simple Ethernet & WiFi stuff, the intelligent reader will instantly
notice that you can plug one end into your "modem" or into your "router",
which itself can be, they say, up to 100 meters away without a repeater:
<https://www.techwalla.com/articles/how-long-can-i-run-a-cat-5-cable>
But where, in practice, you generally mount that antenna outside much
closer than that because it beams the WiFi signal for miles anyway.

In summary:
o If you need to connectg to devices which can be miles away
o At about the same price that you pay now for your home equipment
o You can connect to those far away devices if you know how to do it

That's my contribution of value to this particular Usenet potluck thread.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 11:24:32 -0600, rbowman wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model

IEEE 802.3 (Ethernet) and IEEE 802.11 (WiFi) layer 2 specifications. The
OSI 7 layer model and RFC1122 5 layer model get cloudy when combined.
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1122

The IEEE 802 family follows the OSI model and is concerned with how the
physical layer is used to transmit data. 1122 is rooted in DARPA and
like most government projects it assumed there was some sort of magic
that was going to shuffle bits around. In any case the TCP/IP is way up
the tree.

I think much of the confusion stems from the fact that we're discussing two
somewhat similar ways to connect an "antenna" to the back of a desktop.

To further clarify what others have been also clarifying, I snapped this
picture, just now, which shows two ways to connect an 'antenna' to the back
of a typical desktop computer (aka "Ethernet" & "Wi-Fi"):
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>

In the end analysis, while the costs are the same, the POWER is
fantastically different, and yet, the result is your typical "Wi-Fi", which
you can verify, for example, using your phone with freely available apps:
<https://i.postimg.cc/25v3FT6S/debug-on-android.jpg>

Notice that this desktop has both types of connections:
a. There's a typically puny Wi-Fi "device" attached to this desktop
b. There's a powerful Wi-Fi "device" attached to the desktop RJ45 port

Both cost about the same in terms of both price & setup (which is minimal).
o But only one will be found at a typical consumer-focused box store.

One will get you distances of roughly a few hundred feed (or so).
o While the other will garner distances easily of a few miles (or so).

Just to be clear for those who simply want us to explain tools more simply
o For the price of what people already seem to pay for their home stuff
o They can buy "this stuff" which easily connects to "your stuff"
<http://img4.imagetitan.com/img4/yc96C7uYT0bZcOj/18/18_wifi.jpg>

Where "your stuff" includes anything you have in the house that
o Connects to what we colloquially refer to as "Ethernet", or,
o Connects to what we colloquially refer to as "Wi-Fi".

Where the main drawback of "this stuff" is
o It's generally a bit larger (but not always) so you need shelf space
o You definitely won't ever find "this stuff" in the normal box stores

So you simply have to KNOW that this kind of power is available to you.
o And then you simply need advice on "what stuff" to purchase online

Where, the elegant beauty of "this stuff" is the sheer simplicity of it all
o One end of "this stuff" is what we colloquially refer to as "Ethernet"
o The other end is what we colloquially refer to as "Wi-Fi".

For example, here is a picture of "this stuff" showing both hose ends:
<https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>
And here is another picture of "this stuff" showing both those ends:
<https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg>
Where this pictures shows some of the many shapes & sizes of "this stuff"
<https://i.postimg.cc/YqTk0q1T/ap.jpg>

Notice the key colloquial takeaway to explain the immense power here:
o One end attaches to ANYTHING you have that you'd call "Ethernet"
o The other end attaches to ANYTHING else that you'd call "Wi-Fi"

--
My contribution to the Usenet potluck is that this power is available to
you, should you ever need it, at about the same price you're paying now,
for box-store equipment which is ten to one hundred times less powerful.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 13:03:36 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 wrote:

I think to a reasonable person, having Wi-Fi available at your home
means it's either available through a simple WiFi router connected
to cable, DSL, etc. Or it's available from a local WiFi hotspot
that reaches your house. Not that you need a friend somewhere and a
point-to-point relay in between.

Hi trader,

Why do you insist on proving you don't belong on this type of news group?

As usual, you contributed nothing of any value to this Usenet potluck
(where the last time you did that, it went sort of like this):

Q: How do you fix a tire at home that I'm having issues trying to fix?
A: Duh. You always simply pay someone else to fix everything for you.

Bearing in mind, I don't bullshit, you know this to be a fact:
o Did you ever have a batch of tires that just wouldn't seal after the final bead?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.home.repair/ST-xNgC5pnU/vkePS4r-AgAJ>
Where you said, and I repeat, in full, verbatim:
"Silly me, I just pay $15 a tire to get them mounted and
dynamically balanced. No fuss, no muss..."

Reparing, mounting, and balancing your own tires at home, Trader
o Is something that I do all the time - and I love fixing stuff like that.

Yet, the fact is - you despise fixing stuff - and that's OK.
o What's not OK are incessantly worthless responses on this fixit group

Notice the dynamic that you always seem to prove, Trader:
1. Someone asks a technical repair question which others help answer
2. Yet you tell them they have to pay someone else to fix it for them

Why are you even on a fixit newsgroup, Trader ...
o ... if you can't fix anything?

I consider it a basic American right to be able to fix my own stuff.
o While all you do is waste everyone's time, Trader - saying not to.

I didn't challenge you then when you wasted everyone's time, Trader,
but all you _ever_ do, is waste everyone's time on this newsgroup.
o You don't fix anything
o You can't fix anything

But apparently, you NEED someone to challenge you on wasting our time
o Because if I don't challenge you - you continue to waste our time

Let's face the facts Trader...
o You're better off NOT responding to _any_ thread I proffer

You have absolutely nothing of value to add to ANY technical topic.
o And yet, you _insist_ on proving that - time and again.

Stop it.
o Please.

Stop wasting our time with your childish games you love to play.
o If you can't add any technical value to this thread - then don't post.

To help those who _can_ comprehend what I'm suggesting in this thread
o Here is a photo I just took showing the "typical" desktop connections
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>

--
My contribution to the Usenet potluck in this thread is to explain what
power is available to the typical home user at the same price they are
paying now for far less powerful equipment. If they NEED the power, this is
potentially useful technical information, particularly since this equipment
is NOT found in the typical consumer oriented hardware or electronic box
stores.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 14:02:13 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 wrote:

On Saturday, October 12, 2019 at 3:56:08 PM UTC-4, Al Gore wrote:
On 10/12/2019 1:12 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 at 12:48:29 PM UTC-4, Al Gore wrote:
On 10/12/19 11:57 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, October 12, 2019 at 6:29:18 AM UTC-4, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, October 11, 2019 at 6:08:41 PM UTC-4, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, October 11, 2019 at 3:51:37 PM UTC-4, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 12:25:16 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton wrote:

And only a loon would define wifi access at your home as meaning you
have to put in eqpt at some 'friend's house' kilometers away to make
it possible. I'm with you, there are various wifi hotspots in the
area around here, but none that I can pick up at my home.
I don't use WiFi hotspots. You never know where they've been.
While it's normal for Trader to misunderstand even the most basic of things
o In general, most users on this newsgroup comprehend what Ethernet is

That would exclude you, because you're talking about Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi
isn't Ethernet.
Ehhh. It sort of is, since it uses the Ethernet packet protocol.

Cindy Hamilton
It uses packets, but it's not Ethernet, the physical layer and lower
protocol layers are totally different. Ethernet is defined on wires.



Wrong again

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/docs/wireless-products/wireless-ethernet-lan-faq.html
Just because some new hire at Intel got it wrong, does not make it so.
Notice that even there, aside from the title, they don't call Wi-Fi
Ethernet. The relevant LAN standards are controlled by the IEEE
under 802.X:


[snip]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/local-area-network-wi-fi-wireless,3020-5.html

Wireless Ethernet: 820.11a To 820.11g
The most common forms of wireless networking are built around various versions of the IEEE 802.11 wireless Ethernet standards, including IEEE 802.11b, IEEE 802.11a, IEEE 802.11g, and IEEE 802.11n.

Given the choice between Tom's Hardware and the IEEE that controls
the actual 802 LAN standards, I know which one I'd go with. You're
free to do as you please. Even if you walk into a BestBuy and
ask for an Ethernet card, do you think you;re going to get a WiFi
card? And if you walk in and ask for a WiFi card, I suppose you
think they will direct you to the gigabit Ethernet cards? Funny
how laptops and such have typically had both Ethernet and WiFi
available, one through a wired connector, the other through the air,
eh?

Hi Trader,

Why must you insist on never posting with any purposefully helpful intent?
o The less we challenge you - the more are emboldened to waste our time

The last time you tried to play these silly games, was when I had asked a
specific technical question on choosing, buying, repairing, mounting, &
balancing my own SUV tires at home - where I ignored the fact that then, as
now, you had nothing of value to add to the Usenet potluck where we all
bring to the table what value we can offer each other.

Remember that?
o No?

Well, let me refresh your memory then, OK?
o Did you ever have a batch of tires that just wouldn't seal after the final bead?
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.home.repair/ST-xNgC5pnU/agDaRH_JAgAJ>

Do you remember your "added value" then, Trader?
o No?

Well then, allow me to refresh your memory, Trader:
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.home.repair/ST-xNgC5pnU/vkePS4r-AgAJ>
Where your purposefully & decidedly unhelpful "help" was, verbatim...
"Silly me, I just pay $15 a tire to get them mounted and
dynamically balanced. No fuss, no muss..."

Notice you added zero purposefully helpful technical value then...
o As now...

Where, in that case, don't you think EVERYONE knows that they can simply
pay someone else to debug and fix all their technical problems, Trader?

Do you think that your advice was even slightly helpful, Trader?
O Really?

Let's get back on to this topic of explaining to the members of this
newsgroup that, if they need it, they "can" extend the range of their Wi-Fi
connections, at about the same price they're paying now for "their stuff".

They just need to know what this stuff does for them in terms of power...
o And how this stuff connects, specifically, to their desktop computers.

In a further attempt at being purposefully helpful, Trader, I just snapped
and then carefully annotated this shot of one of my old desktops showing
what a typical desktop owner "can do" in terms of connecting to a Wi-Fi
access point, when running a Cat5 cable to that connection, is infeasible.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>

--
My contribution to the Usenet potluck in this thread is to explain what
options are available to the typical home user that they might not know are
available to them, and, better yet, at about the same price they are
paying now for what is very likely to be far less powerful equipment. If
they NEED the power described here, then (and only then) this is
potentially useful technical information, particularly since this equipment
is NOT found in the typical consumer oriented hardware or electronic box
stores.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 14:33:16 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 wrote:

Heh, asshole, your off topic post isn't even about home repair.
And let;s review. You replied to Cindy that everyone has WiFi
available at home and made the stupid assertion that's true because
some lucky few that don't have WiFi available directly can take what
amounts to a repeater and use internet at a friends house some distance away.
Did I say that was stupid? No, but it sure is. I just pointed out
that most people would not consider what you described to mean that
everyone has access to WiFi at their home.

Hi Trader,

Why am I an "asshole" because you don't understand basic things?

At the risk of asking the obvious, did you even LOOK at this picture?
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>

If you looked at it, at the risk of proffering another obvious question
o Do you comprehend that each of those "antennas" can connect to Wi-Fi?

One more super obvious question for you, Trader, just to be clear:
o Do you realize that the Wi-Fi connection can be anything they have?

Um ... like their typical Wi-Fi-enabled SOHO router, Trader.
o Or, anything that's typical Wi-Fi, Trader.

Let's summarize the basics for you, Trader, shall we?
o Any typical Ethernet
o Any typical Wi-Fi

Let us know when you comprehend that basic fact.
o Because the point is that this power is available to everyone.
o At about the same costs as what they paid for what they have now

Only what's better about this setup, Trader, is
o It's vastly more powerful than their typical home setup today.

Which, if they need that power...
o Is a good thing, is it not?

--
Note that if people don't need this kind of Wi-Fi power, then, of course,
this thread isn't for them. It's only for those who can't connect
everything via Ethernet - such as their mobile devices at the pool and
their desktop computers which might be in far corners of their home.

 

[Grumpy Old White Guy]

On 10/12/2019 5:34 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

Hi Trader,

Why must you insist on never posting with any purposefully helpful intent?
o The less we challenge you - the more are emboldened to waste our time

The last time you tried to play these silly games, was when I had asked a
specific technical question on choosing, buying, repairing, mounting, &
balancing my own SUV tires at home - where I ignored the fact that then, as
now, you had nothing of value to add to the Usenet potluck where we all
bring to the table what value we can offer each other.

He_4 has been kind of cranky ever since President Trump was exonerated.

--
Get off my lawn!

 

[Ed Pawlowski]

On 10/12/2019 5:16 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 13:03:36 -0700 (PDT), trader_4 wrote:

I think to a reasonable person, having Wi-Fi available at your home
means it's either available through a simple WiFi router connected
to cable, DSL, etc. Or it's available from a local WiFi hotspot
that reaches your house. Not that you need a friend somewhere and a
point-to-point relay in between.

Hi trader,

Why do you insist on proving you don't belong on this type of news group?

As usual, you contributed nothing of any value to this Usenet potluck
(where the last time you did that, it went sort of like this):


Stop wasting our time with your childish games you love to play.
o If you can't add any technical value to this thread - then don't post.

If the best you can do is make a long post just to denigrate another it
is you wasting everyone else's time. Your mother would be ashamed of
you and your values.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 18:20:40 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

If the best you can do is make a long post just to denigrate another it
is you wasting everyone else's time. Your mother would be ashamed of
you and your values.

OK. I'll ignore Trader_4 for the remainder of this thread...
o Starting now.

Besides, I think I've almost fully shot my wad on this topic unless...
o Unless one of the recipients wants to try it themselves.

They might have questions since you have to know what to buy
o And you have to know how to set it up

Which depends on what you're doing with it.

For example, if you're simply "painting the pool"
o So that the kids can be on their phone far from the house

The software switches will be different than if you're connecting to an AP.

Rest assured, this equipment can do anything you typically want to do
o Where the switches inside the router software make it what it is.

In summary, I haven't covered the software because it would only matter if
someone needs help setting theirs up - otherwise - all that really matters
is two things:
o The distances people volunteered are real - and very possible
o If you simply purchase this equipment - instead of the 'consumer' stuff

The good news is that it costs just about the same as consumer stuff
o But the bad news is that it's usually (not always) a bit larger stuff

--
Sharing purposefully helpful ideas on Usenet; one idea at a time.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sat, 12 Oct 2019 18:06:20 -0400, Grumpy Old White Guy wrote:

> He_4 has been kind of cranky ever since President Trump was exonerated.

Hi Grumpy Old White Guy,

I've been on Usenet for as long as anyone here.
o Where I delve into facts as deeply as anyone else does

Hence, I've posted so many helpful tutorials that I long ago lost count of
how many, and while I've posted so many questions and have received so many
helpful responses that I've lost count ....

Never once have I delved into politics on this newsgroup.

--
I can delve deeply into politics; but this isn't the place for it.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 04:22:51 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

Ethernet is a cable format.

Not accurate. There are many types of Ethernet connections. The first
Ethernet I used was a coax cable. My office is connected via a
fiber optic Ethernet connection.

It will not recognise a radio signal.

This is true, but generally the change from Ethernet to radio and back is
seamless to the user (like in WiFi), and nearly never of any importance
to anyone at all.

Thanks Lewis for helping to clarify, for Lucifer, what's possible, since
Lucifer, like nospam, seems to brazenly & repeatedly deny what the rest of
us know works just fine, even down to denying that decibels are used to
indicate power (where Lucifer & nospam appear to be twins in their ability
to brazenly deny what everyone else already knows to be facts).

To further illustrate switching from Ethernet to Wi-Fi & vice versa,
this picture graphically shows the mechanical components inherent in this
common and constant switcheroo between Ethernet & Wi-Fi & back:
<https://i.postimg.cc/SK04C6zL/ubiquiti-bullet-M2-hp.jpg>

This home-built $50 WiFi-to-Ethernet-and-Ethernet-to-Wifi setup also works:
<https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg>

Using the term "modem" for my "transceiver" so people with cable can better
understand, the Internet signal goes from the "modem" inside the house, to
the SOHO router next to the "modem", and then out an RJ45 port on the SOHO
router to this radio & antenna which is outside the house, which either
points back at the house, to "paint" the inaccessible regions of the house
or ...

Or ...

You'll notice the antenna is on a loose swivel, which allows me to turn it
around to paint the pool, which is a few hundred feet from the house, where
painting the pool allows cellphones to connect to this AP, where the pool
is too far from the house for cellphones to connect to the SOHO router WiFi
connected to the "modem" inside the house.

In quite a different setup, this similar setup allows a desktop, say one
that is outside, say, in the barn which is too far from the house, to
easily connect back to the WiFi at the house, or, if desired, to a WiFi
access point which can be miles away from this stand-alone desktop PC:
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>

And still get great signal strength of around -55dBm of power:
<https://i.postimg.cc/DZccY2YD/decibels.jpg>

In fact, there are so many things you can do with these inexpensive radios,
that I have them scattered all over, since I have plenty of them to play
with to connect anything I want to connect to, if it has Internet and if I
know the security setup keys:
<https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg>

What's nice, also, is you get great graphics out of the signal strength
debuggers on Android phones, which allow you to ascertain exactly which
access points have the best signal strength in whatever spot you're in:
<https://i.postimg.cc/BZrZpDyp/debug-apps.jpg>

Given this all "just works", I'm not sure why Lucifer, who claims to have
been a "communications technician", says it doesn't work, so I appreciate
that Lewis attempted to clarify that the switcheroo between Ethernet and
Wi-Fi and from Wi-Fi to Ethernet ... is so simple ... it just works.

--
I take the time to post pictures becuase I care about my credibility.

 

[Johann Beretta]

On 10/8/19 10:52 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

Just curious how far your Wi-Fi access point is from your desktop computer.
https://i.postimg.cc/VvqLKQtQ/wifi.jpg

The access point my desktop connects to is about a half dozen miles away.
An antenna is plugged into the RJ45 Ethernet port on the desktop.
The signal strength, even at more than a half-dozen miles, is about -55dBM.

Just curious how far your nearest WiFi access point is from your desktop?

Uh.. Yeah.. Your "desktop" isn't connecting to jack squat. You've got
two Ubiquiti radios linked together. An Ubiquiti radio is connected to
another Ubiquiti radio that's a half dozen miles away.

When someone says "my desktop is connected to" the implication is that
you're connecting to something using the built-in wifi of the laptop.
Needless to say, there's no way you'd be making a 6 mile link at 144mbps
with the 30mw (average) laptop transmitter. You'd also need 20-30 feet
of elevation to keep the transmitter's Fresnel zones clear.

 

[Johann Beretta]

On 10/11/19 12:32 PM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

<snip>

Well, this desktop I'm on at this very moment has a router attached to its
RJ45 port with 23 decibels of transmit power, which itself is attached to a
cheap antenna of, oh, I think this one is about another 18 decibels.
https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg

snip

No you aren't. You're getting 23dbm which is db in relation to a
milliwatt. Neglecting to mention the "m" makes your statement worthless
since db's are just a scale.

Dude, you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

 

[Fox's Mercantile]

On 10/14/19 2:50 PM, Johann Beretta wrote:
> Dude, you haven't got a clue what you're talking about.

Of course not. Arlen's the Usenet equivalent of a turd in
a punch bowl.


--
"I am a river to my people."
Jeff-1.0
WA6FWi
http:foxsmercantile.com

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 02:03:13 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

> PS: You were close enough on the imedence match.

Yikes. In addition to the "dBi" and "dBm" thinkos...
<https://i.postimg.cc/DZccY2YD/decibels.jpg>

There was, in the sig, yet another typo ... "impedance" (not imedence")...

Note the main reason for having to correct the typos is that those silly
little girls on this newsgroup who have nothing to add, will endlessly
quibble about the typos just like you see happening in this thread about
"antenna" versus "radio", where, this set in my basement shows the antenna
and radio can be considered one unit for practical purposes such as the
instruction "aim the antenna, will ya".
<https://i.postimg.cc/XJChDCPr/spare-access-points.jpg>

As I noted with tires, those who quibble about the colloquial use of
something as common as decibels would never get to the more important
points, such as where we discuss in a tutorial how to mount the red dot
<https://i.postimg.cc/Pqq6GGj6/mount09.jpg>
versus what's different when we choose how to mount the yellow dot:
<<https://i.postimg.cc/4yxSFpSp/mount57.jpg>

Where the main point is that if we're trying to get something done,
then quibbling about the fact that tires and wheels are different is
something only those who have zero value to add, will quibble about.

Sure, those trolls are MOST of the posts in this thread.
o But the fact remains the trolls added _zero_ on topic technical value.

Having said that, almost always, the Wi-Fi radios we're talking about are
mounted directly to the antenna (just as SUV tires are mounted directly to
the wheels), there are cases when the Wi-Fi radio is simply "close" to the
antenna, as shown in this box I built myself a few years ago out of spare
parts:
<https://i.postimg.cc/DfQJq437/mikrotikrouter.jpg>

In that case, the radio is "close" to the antenna, as shown in this picture
which shows that the old desktop can be placed hundreds of feet from the
house in the barn, and it will still connect either to the access points
scattered about the property...
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gh22Sb2N/desktop.jpg>
Or, if needed, it can connect to access points literally miles away.
<https://i.postimg.cc/VvqLKQtQ/wifi.jpg>

--
The intelligent adult will note the worthless trolls are being ignored.
(and yet, they still troll ... which is all they _can_ do ... it seems.)

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 02:05:17 -0000 (UTC), Arlen _G_ Holder wrote:

beams 2.4GHz Wi-Fi signal at up to 600mW (about 27 dBi)
https://www.rapidtables.com/convert/power/mW_to_dBm.html

Typo.

Since the trolls here can't everv add value, but can quibble about
meaningless typos like squabbling little girls, that was dBm, not dBi...

Likewise, with this typo...

Note that for about the price of a typical SOHO router of about 15 to 20
decibels, this access point allows up to 27 dBi + 15 dBm = 42 dB

Reverse the "i" with the "m" ... and add "EIRP", where this correction is
necessary becuase the child-like trolls will have a field day over a typo -
since they can't actually add on-topic technical value...

> just as when you buy a new car, the tires and wheels are sold as a single unit.

More correctly, since the trolls will have a field day noting there are
four of them, let's just say the wheels, tires, and car, are sold as a
single unit.... to keep the moronic trolls at bay ... because they can't
actually contribute on-topic technical value - so they quibble like
schoolgirls instead.

--
The intelligent reader will note the classic trolls are being ignored.

 

[Arlen _G_ Holder]

On Mon, 14 Oct 2019 18:33:57 -0400, Paul wrote:

The patch antenna seems too big for
28GHz. If it needed to be that big, the central lobe would
be too sharp to be able to aim it.

Hi Paul,

As you're aware, this isn't my first rodeo with trolls on Usenet,
where, tactically, I respond as a mirror to their implied intent.

Generally you are purposefully helpful, as am I.
o So I won't quibble about your answer (as it was a fair guess).

In addition, I will try to add technical value, as you tried to do.
o Since I act as a mirror to perceived implied intentions.

For that photo <https://i.postimg.cc/cHLndnbY/antenna.jpg>
o That antenna was bought a decade ago, but it's similar to these:
<https://www.streakwave.com/items.asp?Cc=ANT2%2E4FP>
Where, a fair modern comparison, might be this $35 15dBi antenna:
<https://www.streakwave.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=15-537>
With the spec sheet as shown here:
<https://www.streakwave.com/mmSWAVE1/Video/15-537.pdf>

That antenna is simply connected to my router inside the house, which then
beams 2.4GHz Wi-Fi signal at up to 600mW (about 27 dBi)
<https://www.rapidtables.com/convert/power/mW_to_dBm.html>
via this $80 radio attached directly to the back of that antenna:
<https://www.streakwave.com/itemdesc.asp?ic=BulletM2HP-US>

Note that for about the price of a typical SOHO router of about 15 to 20
decibels, this access point allows up to 27 dBi + 15 dBm = 42 dB, which is
vastly more powerful than any typical SOHO router access point you've ever
experienced in your entire life, I'd wager.

I repeat what the trolls accused me of not understanding, which they
themselves simply fabricated, which is that every 10 decibels is 10 times
the power so for there to be that many decibels difference, is huge, at
about the price as your normal consumer equipment is at the box stores.

Of course, this stuff isn't sold in the box stores, most likely, so you
have to simply KNOW about this stuff, which was, partly, the intention of
this purposefully helpful thread.

Bear in mind, the radio is always attached directly to the back of that
antenna, as is the radio attached directly to the back of this 2.4GHz Wi-Fi
antenna in my house right now.
<https://i.postimg.cc/nrkz5mgs/antenna01.jpg>

Likewise, the radio is attached directly to this 5GHz Wi-Fi antenna, Paul:
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNXw0TZS/antenna02.jpg>

Perhaps most importantly, this 2.4GHz WiFi radio is physically a part of
the antenna - which means you can't possibly separate the two - they're one
unit - which - of course - is why we refer to such things, colloquially -
as "aim the antenna" will ya...
<https://i.postimg.cc/CLBXc080/antenna03.jpg>

Please look at that latter situation, Paul.

If you remove the radio - the "dish" has a huge hole in it that does
nothing, since the "horn" is on the radio, and not on the parabolic dish.

The point is that the radio and the antenna are considered a single unit
(and, in fact, are only sold as a single unit), just as when you buy a new
car, the tires and wheels are sold as a single unit.

And, more importantly when you're trying to help people get stuff done,
when I write a tutorial for how to mount your tires at home:
<https://i.postimg.cc/WzZW9MvT/mount07.jpg>
You can assume, a priori, that everyone is well aware SUV tires & wheels
are different, but they are always directly attached to each other.

Just as when I write a tutorial for how to balance your tires at home,
<https://i.postimg.cc/28JK2bFB/mount58.jpg>
You can assume, a priori, that everyone is well aware SUV tires & wheels
are different, but they are always directly attached to each other.

The fact I'm trying to explain, is what you try to write something like a
o Tutorial for how to balance your SUV tires at home
o Tutorial for how to aim your WiFi antenna at home
All you should need to do is mention just once that when we say
o "mount the tires",
it's assumed intelligent adults know SUV tires are directly attached to wheels
Just as when we say:
o "aim the antenna",
it's assumed intelligent adults know WiFi radios are directly attached to antennas

--
PS: You were close enough on the imedence match.