Network deployment, potential issues

[Black Hades]

I've been working on a wireless network for a SOHO and was wondering if there's a problem with this configuration. I'm primarily concerned about stability issues on the wireless side.
The 3 fixed PC's will have wireless N cards via D-Link DWA-547. The laptops are G and whatever the guests will bring at the table for the moment.
I understand that mixing G and N on the same band slows down speed from 50-80% for N clients as well.

Asking the advice of someone more experienced maybe. Is this doable. I want to use that router for a wireless network of 4-12 clients max without stability issues.

Thanks in advance

Sketch:

 

[lemonadesoda]

Remember that each extra PC communicating via wifi crowds out the channel. If only one PC is communicating at a time, then no problem. But if multiple PCs are (trying to) access the same AP at the same time, there is contention, errors increase, and they all have to fit into (share) the bandwidth.

If concurrent bandwidth is important to you, then wire whatever PCs you can, or consider putting one of the PCs on ethernet-over-power.

PS. Cant see your picture... so dont know what you are showing... there may be other points.

 

[Kreij]

You should not have stability issues, but as Lemon pointed out you will have a fixed amount of bandwidth for all of the users.

It really depends on what the users will be doing. It also depends on how you have the clients configured. Are the applications they are running local to the client or are they running as a thin client from a server?

Four to twelve users should not bury a wireless connection unless you have a couple running very high bandwidth intensive apps (like torrents).

Your sketch is a bad link so we are in the dark here.

 

[Disparia]

Seems to be a lot of img problems today, in this and other threads. I see it just fine.

http://img.techpowerup.org/091214/nettest324242.jpg

 

[Black Hades]

There wont be much bandwidth hogging I think. No thin clients or centralized software. Each PC with it's own software processing data on the NAS.
It'll involve daily office work. Mostly spreadsheets and docs and once in a while a video or audio file. Files moved about will rarely be larger than say 256Mb. Stability would be my main concern. And the soho will move once every few months, that's why wireless is so important, the need to be able to swiftly move equipment around without rerouting & bolting down wires and these kind of things.

Was wondering if the bandwidth/conectivity for say 6 pc's connected permanently to that router is acceptable under these terms.

Edit:

I did a sweep of the area, there's only one weak signal wireless network present in the area, and the office has a favorable topography.
I could get a dual band router instead of that D-link Dir-655 and connect the closest clients to 5 Ghz broadcast and the others to 2,4 Ghz. But I don't think it's necessary for such a small network

 

[lemonadesoda]

Moving fíles of 256Mb will "bog down" the wifi connecrtion for a good few minutes. You really shouldnt use shared wifi for moving large amounts of data. It is ideally suited to web-browsing or for small PDFs, Word and Excel files, and email, ie. typical "transfers" under 1MB. Then it would happily handle 6 clients.

Please post a new copy of your picture.

I would suggest a WIRED NAS attached to your router. That would halve the wifi-data and quarter the contention compared to peer-to-peer files sharing. And if and when someone needed to do a lot of "file-manager" work, they could just directly wire to the router/NAS for that period of work, then wifi again.

 

[Black Hades]

^ I re-uploaded the picture & updated the 1st post, hope it shows now for everyone LINK
The NAS will be wired down to the router only the PC's & potential guest PC's will be wireless.

Straght blue line would be wired part
Dotted blue, wireless
Green, UPS protected
Black square ended, USB connected
It's pretty intuitive anyway

 

[lemonadesoda]

Picture now shows.

In my experience, "combo" routers, ie. router, switch plus wireless AP all in one, can get bogged down pretty quick.

I would recommend:
1./ Consider getting another switch, so that the fixed PCs and NAS are all on the same switch. The Dlink then just acts as router and wireless AP.

2./ You might not need another switch if you put the "VoIP switch" INSIDE the LAN, ie behind the router. I dont know how your VoIP system works, but this is what we have on our LAN.

3./ How much scanning do you do? If a lot, then consider a second hand HP9200c. We have 2 of those. Or think about how to get that scanner directly on the LAN. Unless scanning is very rare, I dont like a workflow that requires a lot of "manual intervention" in the scan and file management process. A network attached scanner is much better for this.

 

[Black Hades]

In my experience, "combo" routers, ie. router, switch plus wireless AP all in one, can get bogged down pretty quick.
[...]
1./ Consider getting another switch, so that the fixed PCs and NAS are all on the same switch. The Dlink then just acts as router and wireless AP.
[...]

The fixed PCs are supposed to be wireless, that's the whole idea behind this network, otherwise I'd resort to another router altogether.

Bogged as in slowed down? for this particular office scenario? Or bogged down as in frequent router resets and the manager looking to draw blood, mine to be exactly ?

 

[lemonadesoda]

You are overdoing this "need" to be wireless. Esp. since you have wired phones.

Define what your needs are.

If your "needs" include moving around large files and scans, up to 256MB (not 256KB), then you are doing to need to implement wired network. Add to this your desire to avoid a blood letting, and case closed.