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

The useful takeaway is that we can extend our WiFi range by miles. o Where fixing WiFi range is something people do all the time using this

If you have no need to ever extend you WiFi range, so that you can paint your pool or so that you can use your electronics far from the house, then this thread is the wrong topic for you to post on.

For example, simply plugging this into your laptop, vastly extends range:

Which group(s) do you think fixing/setting up WiFi is inappropriate on?

If you feel this thread is not for one of these groups, tell us why:

It will be interesting to hear your factual adult rationale.

Hi Dan Purgert,

The useful takeaway is that we can fix our WiFi range by miles.

Facts: o On the outside, it's called a "nanobeam"

Assessment: o Moving forward, I'll call it a "powerbeam"

In that photo above, you can use just the horn to extend your range by bridging your laptop Ethernet to WiFi, without much fuss as it's light plastic.

Essentially, you set up the router software & then you can plug that powerbeam horn into any Ethernet ready laptop or desktop to vastly extend the WiFi range. Except for price, this beats a USB dongle (IMHO), where it's certainly no more costly than adding a repeater would be.

You can use the laptop with both horn & dish, but it's gonna be bigger.

I have no problem naming the device formerly known as a nanobeam as a "powerbeam". o I was never one to quibble about such semantic things anyway

It's the trolls who can only quibble about such things that cloud the otherwise adult technical valuable conversations on Usenet.

Back to JP Gilliver's question and to pjp's question o I think any of the suggested Ubiquiti WiFi devices will work.

A LOS kilometer is puny for WiFi with these things, is it not?

Since we're trying to repair his Internet signal, we need to know of pjp a. What country b. What wind conditions

Let's clarify a few things for the general observer of this thread on that.

1. Since we're discussing TWIN devices, this "5AC" idea is feasible.
2. However, the distances are puny where 802.11 LOS will work just fine.
3. Plus, "5AC" generally costs more, where it's not needed (IMHO).
4. And the setup requires, at least "slightly" more knowledge.
5. Worse, WiFi re-use, which I do all the time Dan, is not possible.

Bear in mind, once you have one of these devices, you find uses for them!

Simply because, at WiFi they are as powerful as you can possibly get.

Dan,

Clearly you and Jeff and Johann know far more than most here, including me, so here's a basic set of related questions which, I think, the answer to will edify MANY people on this ng!

WHAT RANGE CAN YOU ENVISION FOR THIS SETUP AT THE FAR CORNER OF A PROPERTY? o Either just the PowerBeam horn (set up legally) plugged into the laptop:

Assuming, of course, clear LOS, low to no interference, etc. stuff. o I haven't tested the range, but it works fine for hundreds of feet, Dan.

Do you think it could go much longer LOS, Dan?

The second question is more apropos for JP Gilliver's "cantenna" query: WHAT RANGE CAN YOU ENVISION FOR THAT SETUP TO A TYPICAL HOME SOHO ROUTER?

The answer to both those questions, would be of use to many I think: a. How far can the PowerBeam connect to a Bullet (& 15dBi) planar antenna b. How far can that same PowerBeam connect to a typical WiFi home router?

Hi Clare, Just answer one question, with one word, of "yes" or "no".

Clearly you know a lot more than I do about cars o I've never said otherwise.

For example, you've advised me many times on how to mount them at home. o And you've advised me on the proper location for the red/yellow dots

In all the decades we've been on Usenet together Clare o I don't recall you chiming in on throwing WiFi for miles thread

That doesn't mean you haven't done so o It just means I don't think of you as a WiFi expert (based on posts)

Here's my yes/no question, of you Clare: o Have you ever connected your WiFi to an AP that is many miles away?

Hi JP Gilliver, I did NOT run the math (I generally just test stuff out in practice), but I wanted to mention something when you noted the "cantenna" stuff we all played with many years ago (yes, me too, before I knew what I know now).

If anyone is contemplating extending the range of their Wi-Fi router, one of the _easiest_ ways to get up to the legal limit allowed by the FCC, is simply to plug this spare $100 PowerBeam horn into the back of the router.

Voila! Instant range. o In seconds, you now have a powerful omni access point at your router

Way better than any "cantenna" will ever be o Simply by plugging in the horn to the back of your router

It doesn't even need to be a "WiFi router" in fact o It could just be a switch!

It's really that easy to vastly extend the range of your home WiFi.

The point is that, after having futzed with all those "cantenna" ideas, and after having bought plenty of those consumer-grade WiFi extenders over the years, my advice is to simply plug one of those horns into your router.

Or, you can plug the horn into the laptop. o Or, both.

I don't know what range is possible under ideal conditions o But I've asked Dan Purgert to purposefully helpfully suggest what he thinks is possible under those two (actually three) conditions:

a. The PowerBeam horn plugged into the router RJ45 (legal setup) b. The PowerBeam horn plugged into the laptop RJ45 (legal setup) c. The PowerBeam horn plugged into both the router & the laptop

Whatever range under ideal conditions that Dan Purgert assesses o I would say are easily doable by ANYONE on this newsgroup who needs it

I suspect the Wi-Fi range under ideal conditions will be measured in miles o But I will defer to Dan Purgert's greater knowledge in that area

Why would I need WiFi to paint a pool? WTF?

or so that you can use your electronics far from the house, then

I can use my electronics far from the house, that would be my smartphone. I can use it in NYC or LA. Oh, and it has mobile hotspot too that I can connect other devices too. There is an adult answer, Nuff said.

Hi Dan Purgert,

I'm advocating they plug the device into the any RJ45 they have handy o Voila! Instant WiFi extended range!

Everything I speak about here is range that almost anyone here can attain o Simply by using the Plain Jane Wi-Fi 802.11 protocols they already use

For example, they can plug this PowerBeam horn into a router or switch o And by doing so, they instantly attain Wi-Fi range at maximum legal power

Note very clearly Dan Purgert ... this works with EVERYTHING they have now o It works with mobile devices, laptops, desktops, routers, switches, etc.

You are, apparently, advocating non-Wi-Fi protocols, for "long shots" o Which is fine, for "long shots"... but it doesn't work with everything

Even so, you said (& I agree) that Plain Jane Wi-Fi can go for miles o In this thread, I'm advocating use of Plain Jane "Wi-Fi" devices

You apparently have a pre-defined predilection for the non-Wi-Fi protocols o But your innate preference for those specific non-Wi-Fi protocols o Does not make suggestions based on Plain Jane Wi-Fi protocols "daft"

It just doesn't.

Non-Wi-Fi protocols are simply another way of accomplishing the same task o Particularly for "long hauls" (where you're talking many miles)

Which is fine but that's NOT what this thread is mostly about Dan. o Even pjp's distances are laughably puny for Wi-Fi protocols, Dan.

So stop saying that the use of WiFi protocols to extend range is daft, Dan. o The WiFi protocols work just fine for extending range at home, Dan.

If someone on this thread simply wants to increase their range at home o Then the Plain Jane 802.11 WiFi protocols are just fine, Dan.

In fact, the Plain Jane 802.11 protocols with EVERYTHING they have, Dan. o For you to imply that's "daft", is, well, it's daft Dan.

I have nothing against your suggestion of non-Wi-Fi protocols o But EVERYTHING I'm suggesting to extend home range is via WiFi protocols

It's not daft, Dan, to use WiFi protocols to extend range at home. o In fact, it's a great idea for home use that works wonderfully well

I'm advocating they plug the device into the any RJ45 they have handy o Voila! Instant WiFi extended range!

Elegant. Simple. Powerful. Functional. Beautiful. KISS. 'Repurposable.

Ubiquiti is using it correctly. A wireless bridge connects two wired networks or segments of one network. That's exactly what you have when you set up wifi. It's a wire at both ends with wireless in the middle. A network, or network segment, need not be multiple devices. A single device qualifies.

The nanobridge's had larger dishes (and higher gain). The nanobeams were the newer product with slightly better CPUs And, I suspect, were designed for much shorter links.

This is not difficult.

decibel =3D a logarithmic scale used to reference one unit of power to another. (which is why you can't transmit in decibels. A decibel is a dimensionless unit. It's used to quantify the ratio between two values, such as signal-to-noise ratio.)

dBm =3D power ratio in reference to a milliwatt

dBi =3D power ratio in reference to an isotropic transmitter. (isotropic is equal in all directions)

mw =3D milliwatts (1/1000 of a watt)

Case in point. I wanted to link my shop to the house LAN. I bought a pair of Ubiquiti Litebeam M5 links. One on the front of the shop and one on the front of the house.

Not bad, 65 MBS. Then spring happened. My Pecan tree and the neighbor's in the front yard leafed out. My link speed dropped to about 100 KBS.

I moved the house transceiver to a sign out next to the street. Line of sight again. Link speed went up to 150 MBS.

Meanwhile, everything at the shop acted like it was just plugged into the AT&T U-Verse modem/router. As it should be.

Side note: Arlen is a carbuncle on the ass of humanity. Every one of his diatribes has been a bullshit laden rant. Whether it be Apple f****ng it's customers, front end tire alignment or this crap about WiFi.

You keep posting pictures of products, instead of product data sheets where we can see the actual specs of what it is. One such product you say you're using is this:

"One more thing, which surprised me just now, is that when I log into the device that I've been calling a "PowerBeam" but which is labeled as a "NanoBeam M2", the router firmware shows up everywhere as "PowerBeam".

Specifically PowerBeam M2 or PowerBeam M2 400

If you pull up the data sheet for this

"> Note very clearly Dan Purgert ... this works with EVERYTHING they have now

How do I connect a smartphone to that? To connect a smartphone or a laptop, desktop, etc using it's built-in 802.11a,b,g,n WiFi, in addition to the PowerBeam M2 you also need a WiFi access point on both ends. The 802.11a,b,g,n WiFi is in THOSE OTHER PIECES OF EQPT. The PowerBeam M2 datasheet does not conform to any of those and from what I see, it will only connect to another PowerBeam M2 on the other end. It's a point-to-point Ethernet bridge, that appears to use their own proprietary implementation.

So, to claim that it works with any mobile WiFi device is wrong. Following that logic, an Ethernet bridge product that uses fiber optic cable also "works with any mobile device". And additionally, in any of the above installations, you only have 802.11a,b,g,n at the access points on either end, through the access point WiFi and whatever range it has. If you have those two miles apart and stand in the middle between them with your smartphone, you have no WiFi access. In short, you keep describing these products as WiFi range extenders, when in fact those that I've seen here are actually wireless Ethernet bridges.

Hi Johann Beretta,

Thank you for those decibel & milliwatt clarifications, where the members of the chosen newsgroups likely have pretty good comprehension of the math. o

What's nice is that our conversation showing how easy it is to extend the range of WiFi is 'permanently' archived in the typical web searchable sites such that others can benefit from the information you and I and Jeff Liebermann shared, now, and long into the future. o

I consider my main shared "item of technical value" was simply that... A. People _can_ obtain this "instant extended range" B. Relatively easily (by plugging these devices into RJ45 ports) C. At "about" the same cost as they pay today for less powerful devices

For example, plugging a properly configured PowerBeam horn into a laptop

Just as plugging in that same horn into your spare old router would instantly & vastly extend the range of otherwise unused router, would it not? (Focus on range, as speeds are limited to the slowest device.)

And, while I've never tried it, I don't see any reason plugging that horn into the back of a "dumb switch" wouldn't also turn it into a powerful omni access point, do you?

Since I haven't tried the switch idea, I'd ask others here who have o Wouldn't all those arrangements work to instantly "extend the range" (where extending the range of a switch is to add the access point).

Again, stated as that, this is very misleading. You haven't really extended the range of WiFi, what you've done is use a wireless Ethernet bridge consisting of two pieces of equipment, one on each end, to extend an Ethernet LAN to another location. Then, if you add an ACCESS POINT at the other location, you will have WiFi 802.11a,b,g,n, ac at that location. What area that covers depends on the access point, not the bridge, which isn't WiFi 802.11x period. And you won't have WiFi that your smartphone, laptop, etc can use in between the two locations either. So, it's not really "extending the range of WiFi.

Along the way you suggested this is a solution to get WiFi to the pool at your house. I don't see the above making sense for that, when there are WiFi range extenders that are 802.11a,b,g,n which can either link to your existing WiFi or link to your router via cable. One of those would cover a pool, backyard, etc. directly. What your solution is good for is if you have two locations at some greater distance apart and you want to set up WiFi within some radius of that new location. That requires your point-to-point link (two pieces of gear), plus a WiFi access point, for a total of three.

is 'permanently' archived in the typical web searchable sites

It's not really what I would call extended range, it's setting up WiFi at another location, covering a different area, beyond the range of the current WiFi. You don't have WiFi in between.

No, it wouldn't because all you'd have is one half of a wireless Ethernet bridge and nothing for it to link to on the other end.

No, for same reasons.

This is the FIRST statement you've made in the post I'm responding to, Johann, that indicates you can post valuable information with purposefully helpful intent - which I appreciate - on behalf of Usenet archives.

The reason I asked you is that question is that, as I had stated prior, I have no experience with running these devices off the grid, but where I know the WISP professionals have solar-charged battery backups at many of their remote sites.

Given I have no experience running these devices off the grid, I'm not sure if the WISP professionals run these devices directly off the 12VDC though, or via inverters, as with the case of the RV, I'm not sure if pjp could run off the inverter or off the battery itself, as, I said, I have no experience running these devices off the grid.

Assuming 1 amp at 12 volts DC (i.e., 12 Watts), the question is how long can an RV battery realistically hold out.

I never owned an RV, so I don't even know how large they are, or how many they have, so, googling, the first hit was this "Basic RV Electricity" o

I only skimmed those RV basics, as I was just looking for the amp hour rating of the typical batteries.

Searching Amazon for RV batteries, this "WindyNation" 100amp-Hour battery shows up a lot so let's start with that for now as a starting point: o WindyNation 100 amp-Hour 100AH 12V 12 Volt AGM Deep Cycle Sealed Lead Acid Battery - Solar RV UPS Off-Grid (1 pc 100 amp-Hour)

So, at 1 amp discharge rate, it seems that battery could last about 4 days in perfect situations, where, we have to leave a reserve (I assume, unless it's a spare battery) cutting that in half, and if we assume other non-ideal conditions, we can cut that half in half, so, it seems, given that battery, at a 1 amp discharge rate, it would last an entire day.

I'm sure you'll let me know where my arithmetic is off, if it is off. o I love to be corrected with facts

Adults do two things, which is why their belief systems are rational o Adults comprehend basic facts, and, o Adults form belief systems that can change if the facts change

Do you concur that the arithmetic works out to 'about a day' of use? o If not, why not.

Please act like an adult, and don't call it a "f****ng battery" for example; just deal with the arithmetic please. Like adults should.

This is another useful adult observation, which will not only help others, but which will also remain in the Usenet archives 'permanently' (for whatever value of permeant the Internet can provide) such that others will find it useful in future searches.

I agree with you that we don't have much of an idea of the foliage o And I agree, we avoid foliage if we can (usually with height)

The good news is that height is possible at both ends, and, that there must be a slope involved since pjp mentioned the shot was "all downhill".

Your advice to narrow the beam is apropos, as is your advice to test it out, which is what we do all the time out here (but we have a LOT of spare equipment, including a light tripod to mount the rockets to quite nicely).

I do agree with you also that you start with full transmit power, and then you dial it down until it stops working, and then dial it back up for what I call "headroom" but which has a proper term.

I generally seek about a dozen decibels of what I call 'headroom' (Jeff Liebermann more accurately discussed the terminology & calculations, including a table, in a prior helpful post elsewhere in this thread).

Thanks for that purposefully helpful advice for pjp, which others can also benefit from, given Usenet is a potluck where we all bring items of value to share.

As an interesting, timely, & somewhat related aside, note this news today where people are going to what I'd consider a lot of trouble, just to extend WiFi by 200 feet: o BYU researchers extend WiFi range by 200 feet with a software upgrade

Notice that the EnGadget guys explain what levels people go to in order to extend WiFi range, by 67 meters "beyond the range of standard WiFi".

Here's the lion's share of the proposal... (verbatim to the post end)

"But researchers think there might be another way: a software protocol that extends the distance connected devices can send and receive WiFi by more than 60 meters.

The researchers, led by Brigham Young Unviersity, have dubbed the protocol On-Off Noise Power Communication (ONPC). While WiFi typically requires speeds of at least one megabit per second to maintain a signal, the ONPC protocol can maintain a signal on as little as one one bit per second. That's one millionth of the data speed typically required.

The protocol does this by allowing WiFi-enabled devices to send wireless noise as well as data. According to BYU, it allows the device to send a series of 1s and 0s, essentially turning on and off its signal in a specific pattern. That's enough to tell the WiFi router that the device is still transmitting something (even if no data is being received) and maintain the signal.

"It's basically sending 1 bit of information that says it's alive," says Professor Neal Patawri of Washington University in St. Louis.

When put to the test, the ONPC protocol allowed the researchers to extend the range of an off-the-shelf device 67 meters beyond the range of standard WiFi."

Two things here. One is that extending the range to the point that it's at one millionth of the data speed typically required, makes it typically USELESS. What good is any range extension when your data rate is 1 bit/sec?

Second is that it's research, not a project, so there is no trouble. If it actually has some use, ie there is some range extension where you can get a lower, but usable data rate, then it could be adopted by the industry. But given that it seems to rely on essentially morse code signaling, carrier on/off, I wouldn't bet on it being designed in. Sounds like a Master's thesis to me.

But at least they have the definition of range extension right, they are extending the range of an existing WiFi beyond it's existing range, so that there is continuous, usable WiFi in a larger, continuous area. What you keep calling range extension is using a point-to-point wireless Ethernet bridge to connect the Ethernet LAN at the first location to a remote second location, and then putting in a new WiFi access point at that location. It's TWO different WiFi access points separated by a distance, and unless the distance is very small, eg a hundred feet, they don't overlap, you have no WiFi in between. The WiFi range at either location is limited by the range of it's access point hardware and there is no WiFi in between the two access points.

Well, first off Ubiquiti are (mostly) 24vdc devices. There are a few cases where they have gone to 48V (AirFiber) but, by and large, they are

There are some devices that will work with as low as 9v, but that's not a good idea as the lower voltages are less efficient and cause extra stress on the device. You can burn out electronics just as quickly with low voltages as you can with high voltages. Well. maybe not as quickly.. but it can damage them eventually.

Well, a 50 amp-hour battery is 1 amp for 50 hours or 50 amps for 1 hour. So.. 50 hours. I wouldn't suggest more than a 50% draw on a deep cycle, so figure a full day (24 hours). I don't know s*it about RVs so maybe RV batteries are bigger than that.

Acid Battery - Solar RV UPS Off-Grid (1 pc 100 amp-Hour)

I concur with that conclusion.

I carry a tripod in my truck. If I'm at all "iffy" about setting up internet at a customer's house, I use the tripod to try it out. If I can get a decent signal using the tripod, then I know I'm good to go once I get the dish up on the roof.

And that's a problem. 1 or 2 dbm more than ideal is all you need. It's a logarithmic scale. 27 dbm isn't a little bit more than 26 dbm. It's a LOT more.

See where this is going? You're saying you'd bump it up a dozen? Well, lets use 20 dbm as a baseline and increase it by a dozen:

I hope I need not explain the issue with your "headroom"

A56D6D9051CD3FF3D2EC26C9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 10/22/19 11:39 AM, Arlen _G_ Holder wrote: <snip>

I suspect that's exactly what it would do... And maybe we finally have a legitimate reason for the 3dbm setting in the config file.

Well, there's more to it than just plugging it in and instantly extending the range.

For one, you need to configure it. LAN settings.. WAN settings.. You're gonna need to disable AIRMax, which is on by default. You need to set your WPA2 password/phrase and you, most certainly, need to set an SSID.

And you really, really, should adjust the transmit power to an appropriate level so one isn't another RF asshole blasting noise far beyond what is needed. If you want better WiFi and you live in a tract home, then setting the transmit power to 28dbm is a dick move.

If you live in the middle of Montana and there's not another house for

Failing to do the above with a 2.4GHz device should be a capital crime. there's only 3 non-overlapping (at 20MHz) channels.. Your neighbor picking up your signal at full bars means you've just f***ed him out of being able to use one of those three. Three neighbors can make wifi miserable for all involved.

Thanks Johann for confirming that it would probably work just fine to plug a spare omni PowerBeam horn into a spare switch to instantly add a powerful WiFi access point out of spare parts already lying around such as these I have on my shelf right now:

That's all easy stuff, where I'd assess setting up these devices to be about the same complexity or simplicity as setting up a home router is.

Basically, I've only used two different settings: o When I set it up like this, it's an instant access point:

As I said many times, we have 40 acre zoning out here, so if you have 79 acres, you can still only build one home on that entire property.

Even so, proper setup is assumed, as there's no indication at this time that anyone wants to set it up any other way, just like when I buy a ski mask, the salesman can warn me once, twice, three times, four times, maybe even five or six or seven times not to rob banks using it.

But after the dozen'th time, the warning gets a bit stale for something that was never gonna happen in the first place.

The good news is that we can easily envision turning a spare switch into a WiFi access point, given that I have tons of spare switches and radios.

What this shows is that re-use is handy when fixing wifi range at home.