How do I set up a large, seamless wifi network?

[Operandi]

This is simply untrue. AP’s don’t have routers in them.

Yeah there seems to be confusion as to what an AP is, probably due to the fact that so many people are recommending putting multiple consumer home routers (which do have DHCP) all over the place to expand their network. APs are more like switches or hubs, DHCP can only come from the gateway (router in consumer space) or a dedicated DHCP server.

 

[Mussels]

AP’s don’t have routers in them.

AP's are a router. If it has a WAN port, it's a router - it routes traffic.

Again, this is just a marketing thing that some companies use to differentiate their products but you dont get "wireless switches" that are just a dumb relay - they have a login page, a DHCP server and a wan port - it's a router.

They are always a router and must be a router unless they're mesh hardware - because you need to be able to log into them and set up and control the wifi SSID and password

 

[claes]

Idk looks like you’ve never used an AP, and I’m not sure you know what a wan port is (why would an AP have one?); best of luck to you, glad your mesh network is working for you

 

[Mussels]

Idk looks like you’ve never used an AP, and I’m not sure you know what a wan port is (why would an AP have one?); best of luck to you, glad your mesh network is working for you

How else are they getting on the network?


Funny that linksys doesnt have that category on their products list

Lets look up their business level version, which they call a BAP because... i have no idea.

Cloud Managed AX3600 WiFi 6 Indoor Wireless Access Point | Linksys | Linksys: US

Then we RTFM

Oh would you look at that - this device is also a router. It just has itself set to automatically disable its own DHCP server if it detects another one.

Enteprise level devices might have something like this but consumer devices do not. I'm getting tired of repeating myself in a loop because people have learned a marketing name for a product that means nothing. It's like saying pepsi isn't a cola, it's a pepsi - they're the same damned thing, the only difference is a software setting

It gives itself an IP address. It gives out IP addresses. It hosts a web page to be controlled on that network.
It's a router. It's just simply set up that if it detects a DHCP server it turns its own off and you need to control it by the cloud. No more, no less.

 

[claes]

Funny thing, I went to the linksys homepage and the second hero, listing products they sell, includes access points. They call them business access points for some reason, but, like I said before, I’m not the one confused about marketing terms. Heck, I shared the netgear page already, and have purchased and owned AP’s from a number of vendors (and mix and match them, even if you assert that I’m not allowed to for some reason).

Honestly, the rest isn’t worth responding to. If you rtfm, then you’d see almost all (all?) of the claims you’re making are incorrect. You’d also notice that this AP has an option for multiple SSIDs, so of course it needs a dhcp server. Is a dhcp server a gateway/router? No. Why do you need to specify a gateway? How come you have to specify a dns server? The only reason this AP has nat and dhcp servers is to do what you say it shouldn’t — isolate users from the lan, which is an advanced option this AP has (it even has a captive portal!). It’s not configured to isolate clients from the lan, as you’ve repeatedly claimed, it’s an option.

The fact that you’ve been evading all of my questions (which are leading) and are unable or uninterested to respond to my claims, instead just “repeating yourself in a loop,” says all that needs to be said.

You’ve been given examples of “mesh” networks that have existed in business environments for 15 years before the mesh protocol was ratified, you’ve had an idiot hobbyist and two certified network admins argue that you’re incorrect and, at times, incomprehensible, and you continue to assert baseless claims while seemingly not understanding what a wan is. No wonder you’re arguing in a loop.

FWIW, I was banging my head against a wall with double NATs (I would’ve made a joke about this in the last sentence but idk enough to be confident if I’d get laughs from smarter people) and subnets for a long time before I moved on to (cheaper, more reliable) business class hardware, which was farrrrr easier to setup (probably like your mesh network) and I, admittedly, can’t claim to be a professional.

I hate this, because I generally enjoy your posts but this is unhealthy. Take care.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Yall are wild.

If you walk into a bestbuy or a target or a walmart or w/e and a router says the word "Mesh" on it. In 99% of cases this is a device with the ability to pair with other devices to create wireless backhaul.

Dont do this. You just made an expensive repeater network and your latency increased like 900%

If you want to do this right:

Take your router
Buy a small switch
Buy 2+ access points
Connect access points to switch
Configure them using whatever terrible phone app they are using now

Congrats, you now have proper wifi that supports wifi ROAMING (IEEE 802.11r/k/v) it looks a lot like "mesh" on paper without the catastrophe.

No seperate networks
No seperate SSIDs
Wired backhaul to switch

You just walk from one room to another and seamlessly continue watching tiktok videos about recipes you will never actually try.


What equipment would I recommend?

Ubiquti
Aruba

simple, easy, works with your router.

mesh systems became a way for bad routers to sell more because of bad features.

Mesh seems cool because it’s the biggest thing they print on the box but all you have really managed is taken your shit Wi-Fi and made it more complex shit Wi-Fi.

Just don’t.

One question just because I'm looking for a bit of clarification why this suggestion works without requiring separate SSID's. Is it because you are using Ubiquti or Aruba? In other words other routers, for example, won't necessarily support handling the shared SSIDs between the AP's or migration of the device to the best node for connectivity? Perhaps this might be more of a question how do multiple AP's manage broadcasting the same SSID without clashing with each other?

 

[Solaris17]

One question just because I'm looking for a bit of clarification why this suggestion works without requiring separate SSID's. Is it because you are using Ubiquti or Aruba? In other words other routers, for example, won't necessarily support handling the shared SSIDs between the AP's or migration of the device to the best node for connectivity? Perhaps this might be more of a question how do multiple AP's manage broadcasting the same SSID without clashing with each other?

You asked several (part) question and tried packaging it as an example. Just an FYI this is usually an indication of assumption so I will try to clarify.

First. Ubiquiti, Aruba were the preffered suggestions, because they cater to soho or prosumer. They are by themsevles (minus the rest of the stack like switches and routers) not only able to be setup by themselves but given there respective apps more simple to setup than say a router. If you are daring though you can use w/e you want as far as APs

Ubiquti
Aruba (HP)
Mist (Juniper)
Aeronet/hive (Cisco)
Ruckus

They will all fundamentally work the same, the difference from a user perspective (barring the actual technical differences between a $700 AP vs a $150 AP) is going to be the setup experience.

for example, won't necessarily support handling the shared SSIDs between the AP's or migration of the device to the best node for connectivity?

Correct. "High end" consumer routers (even old ones considered "high end" way back) may support "Access Point" mode but I can't think of one that supports wifi capability like a true AP. They are generally all MESH setups (wireless backhaul) and/or require they be on different channels and/or SSIDs to operate.

how do multiple AP's manage broadcasting the same SSID without clashing with each other?

It is a misconception that the same SSID and channels wont work together. This is only true of different networks. This causes problems when you are broadcasting in a neighborhood with many different wifi signals. This is not the case when using proper APs.

The answer I eluded too.

Congrats, you now have proper wifi that supports wifi ROAMING (IEEE 802.11r/k/v) it looks a lot like "mesh" on paper without the catastrophe.

when APs are used a "controller" be it an app or device always on or not (APs can communicate with one another) a single SSID, pass phrase, channel settings etc etc etc etc are shared between them. However each AP keeps track of what device is connected too it and their respective signal strengths. Using the protocols above APs have the ability to associate and disassociate devices at will allowing them to wirelessly "roam" between access points. They handle this between themselves using said protocols. Since all other settings are equal the device doesnt know the difference.

On really old equipment that doesnt support any of the roaming protocols, you see this as a temporary drop in connectivity as one AP drops you and the other picks you up.

This is how places like walmart, or starbucks, or malls, or schools do it. Conveniently, APs also give you the ability to broadcast multiple SSIDs (different names channels etc) this is how for example doctors offices or hospitals can have "Staff" and "guest" networks.

I'm going to take a shower and play video games hope that helps

 

[A Computer Guy]

You asked several (part) question and tried packaging it as an example. Just an FYI this is usually an indication of assumption so I will try to clarify.

First. Ubiquiti, Aruba were the preffered suggestions, because they cater to soho or prosumer. They are by themsevles (minus the rest of the stack like switches and routers) not only able to be setup by themselves but given there respective apps more simple to setup than say a router. If you are daring though you can use w/e you want as far as APs

Ubiquti
Aruba (HP)
Mist (Juniper)
Aeronet/hive (Cisco)
Ruckus

They will all fundamentally work the same, the difference from a user perspective (barring the actual technical differences between a $700 AP vs a $150 AP) is going to be the setup experience.




Correct. "High end" consumer routers (even old ones considered "high end" way back) may support "Access Point" mode but I can't think of one that supports wifi capability like a true AP. They are generally all MESH setups (wireless backhaul) and/or require they be on different channels and/or SSIDs to operate.



It is a misconception that the same SSID and channels wont work together. This is only true of different networks. This causes problems when you are broadcasting in a neighborhood with many different wifi signals. This is not the case when using proper APs.

The answer I eluded too.




when APs are used a "controller" be it an app or device always on or not (APs can communicate with one another) a single SSID, pass phrase, channel settings etc etc etc etc are shared between them. However each AP keeps track of what device is connected too it and their respective signal strengths. Using the protocols above APs have the ability to associate and disassociate devices at will allowing them to wirelessly "roam" between access points. They handle this between themselves using said protocols. Since all other settings are equal the device doesnt know the difference.

On really old equipment that doesnt support any of the roaming protocols, you see this as a temporary drop in connectivity as one AP drops you and the other picks you up.

This is how places like walmart, or starbucks, or malls, or schools do it. Conveniently, APs also give you the ability to broadcast multiple SSIDs (different names channels etc) this is how for example doctors offices or hospitals can have "Staff" and "guest" networks.

I'm going to take a shower and play video games hope that helps

I think this reply was very helpful. Thanks.

 

[Operandi]

Enteprise level devices might have something like this but consumer devices do not. I'm getting tired of repeating myself in a loop because people have learned a marketing name for a product that means nothing. It's like saying pepsi isn't a cola, it's a pepsi - they're the same damned thing, the only difference is a software setting

It gives itself an IP address. It gives out IP addresses. It hosts a web page to be controlled on that network.
It's a router. It's just simply set up that if it detects a DHCP server it turns its own off and you need to control it by the cloud. No more, no less.

If you are getting sick of repeating yourself stop saying the same incorrect things over and over. APs and routers are different things, they are not the same thing with a different "marketing" name. Routers have WAN ports and route traffic between netowrks, APs have LAN ports and they don't route traffic or run DHCP servers. Managed switches, IP security cameras, and IP phones all get addresses have management webpages, default IPs, and will get an address from DHCP but those most certainly are not routers either.

Controlling a device by the "cloud" refers to devices that use a management device as a controller to centralize device management and configuration. Unifi's Cloud Key would be an example of this and is essentially how mesh networks work also. At the core it all works the same way with a single gateway / router that has a WAN port, and runs DHCP, and switches, cameras, phones all get their IPs from the DHCP server (most likely running on the gateway / router). A mesh network is no different, only one node in the mesh has a WAN port (or atleast a functioning one), its doing all the same things in the background its just that none of it is exposed to the user and the app does it all for you.

 

[electrowind]

If you are getting sick of repeating yourself stop saying the same incorrect things over and over. APs and routers are different things, they are not the same thing with a different "marketing" name. Routers have WAN ports and route traffic between netowrks, APs have LAN ports and they don't route traffic or run DHCP servers. Managed switches, IP security cameras, and IP phones all get addresses have management webpages, default IPs, and will get an address from DHCP but those most certainly are not routers either.

Controlling a device by the "cloud" refers to devices that use a management device as a controller to centralize device management and configuration. Unifi's Cloud Key would be an example of this and is essentially how mesh networks work also. At the core it all works the same way with a single gateway / router that has a WAN port, and runs DHCP, and switches, cameras, phones all get their IPs from the DHCP server (most likely running on the gateway / router). A mesh network is no different, only one node in the mesh has a WAN port (or atleast a functioning one), its doing all the same things in the background its just that none of it is exposed to the user and the app does it all for you.

Thank you for the clarification and additional information. It's important to have a clear understanding of the differences between various networking devices and terminologies to ensure proper setup and configuration.

To reiterate, routers and access points (APs) serve different functions in a network, with routers typically handling the routing of traffic between networks and APs serving as a wireless access point for connecting devices to a network. Managed switches, IP security cameras, and IP phones also have their own unique functions and features, but they are not routers or APs.

Cloud-based management refers to the use of a central controller or server to manage and configure devices in a network, often through a web interface or mobile app. This can be useful for managing large networks or remote devices. Mesh networks are a type of network topology that utilizes multiple nodes to extend wireless coverage and improve connectivity, and they can also be managed through a cloud-based controller. However, as you pointed out, the core networking functions such as DHCP and routing are still being handled by a central gateway/router.

 

[A Computer Guy]

Thank you for the clarification and additional information. It's important to have a clear understanding of the differences between various networking devices and terminologies to ensure proper setup and configuration.

To reiterate, routers and access points (APs) serve different functions in a network, with routers typically handling the routing of traffic between networks and APs serving as a wireless access point for connecting devices to a network. Managed switches, IP security cameras, and IP phones also have their own unique functions and features, but they are not routers or APs.

Cloud-based management refers to the use of a central controller or server to manage and configure devices in a network, often through a web interface or mobile app. This can be useful for managing large networks or remote devices. Mesh networks are a type of network topology that utilizes multiple nodes to extend wireless coverage and improve connectivity, and they can also be managed through a cloud-based controller. However, as you pointed out, the core networking functions such as DHCP and routing are still being handled by a central gateway/router.

Are AP's a type gateway?

 

[electrowind]

Are AP's a type gateway?

In the context of computer networking, AP (Access Point) can be considered a type of gateway, but not all APs are gateways.

An AP is a device that allows wireless devices to connect to a wired network. It acts as a central point for wireless communication and relays data between wireless devices and the wired network. A gateway, on the other hand, is a device that connects two different networks and enables communication between them.

Some APs may include gateway functionality, allowing them to connect wireless devices to a separate network, such as the internet. In this case, the AP would act as a gateway between the wireless network and the internet. However, not all APs have gateway functionality, and may only provide a wireless connection to a single wired network without any routing capabilities.

 

[Operandi]

Are AP's a type gateway?

No, they are not gateways. Access points are access points, gateways are gateways, need to use the right words for the right things.

Taken from Google snippet.

Network gateways are tasked with linking networks by performing translation between different protocols and data formats at the network boundary. Companies may deploy gateways to connect the corporate LAN to the public Internet or to link different internal networks, such as IT and OT networks.

Routing between networks (which for all practical purposes of how 99% of people interact with them their internal network and the internet) can only be done with by a gateway, which is the WAN port on your router in home consumer gear. In the business and enterprise world you'd call them a gateway, and they may or may not do the actual routing functionality.

APs are more like hubs or switches. They only know about the local network they are physically attached to. The wireless radios have a fixed amount of bandwidth, and the on board CPU and RAM can support a fixed number of clients just like hubs and switches have physical ports.

Some APs may include gateway functionality, allowing them to connect wireless devices to a separate network, such as the internet. In this case, the AP would act as a gateway between the wireless network and the internet. However, not all APs have gateway functionality, and may only provide a wireless connection to a single wired network without any routing capabilities.

You just described a wireless router in your first sentence and an access point in your second sentence.

 

[A Computer Guy]

No, they are not gateways. Access points are access points, gateways are gateways, need to use the right words for the right things.

That is what I am trying to sort out. It seems nobody can agree on how to describe or define an Access Point (including elsewhere on the internet) so when I try to talk about AP's in the future I want to use the right words to avoid getting side tracked with the confusion. Seems to me part of the problem is AP's have quite a spectrum of supported functionality like routers typically consist of several integrated networking functions.

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gateway_(telecommunications)

A gateway is a piece of networking hardware or software used in telecommunications networks that allows data to flow from one discrete network to another. Gateways are distinct from routers or switches in that they communicate using more than one protocol to connect multiple networks[1][2] and can operate at any of the seven layers of the open systems interconnection model (OSI).

So from this perspective to me it seems AP's are gateways with respect to bridging joining LAN and Wireless networks however I may not be understanding or applying the definition correctly, or just confusing people by calling it a gateway. So are wireless networks considered discrete networks? I have a feeling the answer may depend on the perspective. Physically I might say yes, logically perhaps not if they are operating in a single subnet.

 

[1freedude]

Access points fundamentally are radios that convey information from/to the rest of the network. Subnets do not matter in the sense of what they, APs, do. The router gets/gives the information from/to the AP because a wireless station on the network, regardless of VLAN, subnet, port forwarding, encryption, etc., requested the exchange.

The hardware used as an AP is an AP because of the software or firmware running the hardware, and possibly because of marketing.

Gateways can incorporate a router, modem, switch, AP, firewall, into one box, but all have discrete singular functions. The only two things needed to get to the internet are gateway and modem.

I don't know anything about metro ethernet, so I'm probably wrong about the modem part

 

[Operandi]

That is what I am trying to sort out. It seems nobody can agree on how to describe or define an Access Point (including elsewhere on the internet) so when I try to talk about AP's in the future I want to use the right words to avoid getting side tracked with the confusion. Seems to me part of the problem is AP's have quite a spectrum of supported functionality like routers typically consist of several integrated networking functions.

Not really. APs are just another component that moves client traffic around a local network the same way a switch does, they only handle traffic local to your network.

So from this perspective to me it seems AP's are gateways with respect to bridging joining LAN and Wireless networks however I may not be understanding or applying the definition correctly, or just confusing people by calling it a gateway. So are wireless networks considered discrete networks? I have a feeling the answer may depend on the perspective. Physically I might say yes, logically perhaps not if they are operating in a single subnet.

APs have different 802.11 standards to connect to clients, and multiple SSIDs that may be segmented depending on how the network is configured but from a TCP/IP network perspective none of that matters, so no wireless networks are not discrete networks.

 

[claes]

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but for most applications the “discrete networks” are your home/business network and your ISP. The gateway converts the nat between the two and makes your network appear as one device/IP.

 

[Operandi]

Please correct me if I’m wrong, but for most applications the “discrete networks” are your home/business network and your ISP. The gateway converts the nat between the two and makes your network appear as one device/IP.

When I read discrete networks I'm thinking 192.186.1.x and 192.168.2.x kinda thing where they are both part of your network but they are their own individual (discrete) networks.