Hi! First post, opinions needed...

[Z1QR20]

Hello all,

First post here, probably not the last.

I am needing some confirmation on a setup up I am arranging for my work. I’ve only worked in this office 2 months but now I am the “default” IT person here. (which means I know the most about computing and networking, but I am far from pro)


We have a 9 acre nursery property that has a small main office building that needs to communicate with a portable trailer office on the lower portion of the property. The main office is about 20’ – 30’ higher in elevation at the top edge of the property. The trailer is about 800’ away, with some low buildings in between. (green houses)

The main office currently has:

DSL modem
Netgear firewall/router/AP – FWG114P running the PPoE to share the internet
Switch
Server
7 PC’s
3 laptops

The trailer currently has:
2 PC’s
1 laptop
1 awful connection


We have an ancient hub and a coaxial cable running all the way down the property to the trailer. The connection is usually slow if at all. Access databases, etc take forever to work with. So the boss asked me to setup wireless.

I’ve ordered the following Netgear stuff:

For the main office:

WG302 to run in A/P mode
ANT24D18 panel antenna, (18db advertised) to be pole mounted outside w/ approx 25’ total cable

For the trailer:

WG302 to run in bridge mode
ANT24D18 panel antenna, to be pole mounted above trailer w/ approx 33’ cable, just high enough to achieve line-of-sight over the green houses.
FS108 desktop switch

Any worries here? Of all the research I did, this seemed pretty solid, and will provide decent wireless between the trailer and the main building, with some roaming area beyond.

No big trees are in the way, and wireless interference should be minimal if any. (we’re near a retirement community, I’m sure they all have dial up.)


And, yes I know there are cheaper/better antennas, but these Netgear ones include a mounting kit, arrestors, etc. I was getting dizzy checking all the antenna options.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts.

[Z1QR20]

Oops, correction - the AP in the trailer will be a WG102.

:D

[M/Q]

Looks real good in the respect it will do the job asked of it.

I would like to clarify that the second WG302 should be in AP client mode if you are running the first WG302 in AP mode. A bridge link makes more sense, but you then need to run both devices is bridge mode. It sounded like you are maybe using notebooks out in the yard then use point to multipoint configuration.

Are the coaxial cable being made or purchased? The runs are not extremely long, but still must be done perfectly or you will have all sorts of problems. Please be careful with the building or purchase of them, also what is the coaxial cable you are using?

If you are interested, this is how I would have suggested to set this up. It would been to locate the devices in an antenna enclosure up on the mast. It would have eliminated the coaxial run. All you would have had to do is run Ethernet cable to the device/antenna combination and use PoE through the Ethernet cable as well. One such device that I am referring to is advertised by this link.

http://www.pacwireless.com/products/RT24.shtml

Just to publish the advantages:
1. No long runs of coaxial cable, so no RF losses
2. Ethernet cable is cheaper and much easier to run than LMR400
3. No exposed RF connections that degrade from exposure to weather

There is really nothing wrong with your approach, and I did not write all of this to try and make you feel that there was. It was just an exercise to point out some possible improvements in the design. Also since I do not know all of the constraints or particulars, my approach may not even be viable.

Also if you are running another AP inside of the remote location, please make sure to have it on a channel as far removed from the other link, or you may have possible problems from interference.

[Z1QR20]

Thanks!

I looked at the encloser options, but I had concerns about heat and durability. It gets above 100F in the summer here on a regular basis. The WAPS will stay in air conditioned rooms here.

Also, I think the spec I chose will allow for some added flexibility. This is important, as the management here seems to change it's mind on a regular basis.

:)

Noted on the point-to-multipoint, that does make much more sense, as there will be field laptops running inventory and production status.

As far as cable goes, the maint tech here used to build coax cable for the coast guard, he has no prob making this stuff.


The Rootenna thing, is that the same equipment as the Connex Q-bridge? Pretty cool, but seems like it's limited in flexibility of setup.

Thanks for the advise!

[M/Q]

Do me a favor and ask the person making these cables if he has ever made any for microwave frequencies and if they have used crimp style connectors. It cannot be stressed enough how very important this is. I would even goes as far to say that you should purchase these. They are not that much and you can get them customized with the correct connector on each end.

http://www.fab-corp.com/home.php?cat=249

I do not want to say that it cannot be done, but I would not take this on without a SWR/Reflectometer to check the cables afterwards. It took me several tries on one occasion to get a cable correct and that was only determined by the meter as the cable looked physically perfect and ohmed out correctly. This is coming from an ex coastie and amateur radio operator as well.

[Z1QR20]

I do not want to say that it cannot be done, but I would not take this on without a SWR/Reflectometer to check the cables afterwards. It took me several tries on one occasion to get a cable correct and that was only determined by the meter as the cable looked physically perfect and ohmed out correctly. This is coming from an ex coastie and amateur radio operator as well.

All points noted.

Turns out the connectors on the Netgear stuff are NOT ordinary - I'd need a RP N type male to RP SMA cable, (the supplied arrestor is RP N female to female) or go with the supplied adaptor that came w/ the antenna and buy a Netgear RP SMA male to RP SMA male jumper.


We got the mounting positions in place and it looks like the cable lengths will be no greater than 15', so I just ordered the Netgear stuff. Not too much $$, like $60 for both cables. (and no additional labor needed)

Thanks for all the advise!

[Biff.Simpson]

I have a couple of thoughts about the setup...
* Getting the antenna up just above the obstructions is not enough. Any objects within a cigar-shaped region known as the fresnel zone can cause problems. There are a number of online tutorials about this, but the bottom line is, put it up a bit higher than you think.
* I am responsible for wireless networking for 3 hospitals and we do a bridge between two of them and it's worked great for 2 years, but know that you'll get about 22mb of real bandwidth at best. You don't say what applications you're using, but make sure that it will be enough.
* If you already have coax (I'm guessing RG8 or something similar) in place, why not run multimode fiber, using the coax as strain relief? You'll have to either run long-haul gbics at both ends (for gig connectivity) or merely two fiber/copper media converters for 100mb/full duplex, but your weather and security problems go away.

Best of luck.

[M/Q]

Just to expand on the Fresnel Clearance Zone, here is a link that explains it in greater detail. It looks like you will need between 7ft and 9ft clearance above the highest object at the approximate middle of the link path.

http://www.terabeam.com/support/calculations/fresnel-zone.php#feet

[Z1QR20]

Just to expand on the Fresnel Clearance Zone, here is a link that explains it in greater detail. It looks like you will need between 7ft and 9ft clearance above the highest object at the approximate middle of the link path.

http://www.terabeam.com/support/calculations/fresnel-zone.php#feet


No problem there, the mid point is clear.

The real issue we are having is that there is a glitch in the firmware on the WG302 that does no allow it to be set in multi-point mode - only AP mode or repeater. GRR.

[Z1QR20]

BTW -

I can take a laptop and stand in the center of one of the greenhouses (a little over halfway between the antennas) and I can see the signal from each antenna in the laptop's wifi utility. I can't get the AP's to see each other though, I think it's the AP mode issue.

Suggestions anyone? I have a call open w/ Netgear...

[M/Q]

You are correct if the notebook has the ability to connect to either AP. Look at figure 5-6 in the manual.

[Z1QR20]

You are correct if the notebook has the ability to connect to either AP. Look at figure 5-6 in the manual.


My least favorite three letters in regards to electronics:

R M A

:rolleyes:

I guess I'll try again after the new unit shows up next week.


Note to all: version 2 of the WG302 has issues. Everytime you try to select bridge mode or multi-point bridge mode it defaults to repeater. Very annoying.

They're sending me version 1.

[pradeep george]

BTW -

I can take a laptop and stand in the center of one of the greenhouses (a little over halfway between the antennas) and I can see the signal from each antenna in the laptop's wifi utility. I can't get the AP's to see each other though, I think it's the AP mode issue.

Suggestions anyone? I have a call open w/ Netgear...
if u r using an access point it is better to have a wired onnection from ateway to access point. also the access point will have to be set in the access point mode instead of gateway mode.

[Z1QR20]

if u r using an access point it is better to have a wired onnection from ateway to access point. also the access point will have to be set in the access point mode instead of gateway mode.

Uh..yes. Indeed.

[Z1QR20]

Got a new unit yesterday, got it up and running today. Excellent speeds.


Bridge to bridge mode in each AP, with mac address access control turned on and WEP. The WG302 acts as a bridge and and AP at the same time, so office users can cruise out to the patio for lunch/work on laptops.

The boss is happy.

Thanks all for the advise.

[M/Q]

Just for my edification, you only have one device at the remote site and it is linking with the office as well as broadcasting to client computers in the vicinity? If that is true then the device is not in bridge mode, it is most likely in repeater mode. As a device in bridge mode will only link with one other device.

[Z1QR20]

Just for my edification, you only have one device at the remote site and it is linking with the office as well as broadcasting to client computers in the vicinity? If that is true then the device is not in bridge mode, it is most likely in repeater mode. As a device in bridge mode will only link with one other device.

Normally? Yes, but the WG302 (the main office AP) can be set in bridge mode and still function as an AP.

The settings page states: "Access Point Mode: Bridge (Point-to-Point) + Access Point".



The WG102 on the other end (remote office client) is in bridge mode only.

Nifty.

[M/Q]

Those are kind of just words, as it is still repeating the traffic. There is a fine line difference between repeating and WDS repeating which I think comes into play here.

[Z1QR20]

Those are kind of just words, as it is still repeating the traffic. There is a fine line difference between repeating and WDS repeating which I think comes into play here.

Well after spending 30 minutes on the phone to India talking to Netgear support and having to RMA the thing to get an earlier hardware version, and having the boss get impatient, the only words I care about here is "it works well".

:D


Here's a dnagerous question - is MAC filtering sufficient for security? I have encryption + MAC filtering turned on right now.

[M/Q]

I agree totally

Does that setup allow WPA? MAC Filtering is rather useless IMO. If a person can break encryption, they definitely can spoof a MAC addr and replace a client station to gain access. All I see it doing is adding a great deal of work with no gain. Also do not shut off SSID broadcasting as that is the same way.

[Z1QR20]

I agree totally

Does that setup allow WPA? MAC Filtering is rather useless IMO. If a person can break encryption, they definitely can spoof a MAC addr and replace a client station to gain access. All I see it doing is adding a great deal of work with no gain. Also do not shut off SSID broadcasting as that is the same way.


It allows WPA, but not in bridge mode - only WEP.

We don't have alot of wireless clients, so shutting off SSID broadcast and turning on MAC filtering, plus WEP is about the max I can do security wise. Maintaining only a few MAC addresses is no big deal.

[M/Q]

OK MAC filtering is alright then. But, please leave SSID broadcast on. You will lose about 15-20% bandwidth just by turning that off. It forces all of the stations to transmit probe request traffic all of the time and thus force the root device to answer all of them. It is a complete falsehood that hiding that will do absolutely any good for security.

[Z1QR20]

OK MAC filtering is alright then. But, please leave SSID broadcast on. You will lose about 15-20% bandwidth just by turning that off. It forces all of the stations to transmit probe request traffic all of the time and thus force the root device to answer all of them. It is a complete falsehood that hiding that will do absolutely any good for security.

Noted.

Thanks!!