[Solved] Purchase of devices to create a mesh network for a single-family house

Hi,

I want to set up a mesh network. I have an Orange Sagemcom Funbox 3.0 Fast 5656 PP modem. I bought a Smart Wi-Fi Box from them, but it works so badly that even a voice call on Skype is impossible (which is strange, because the speeds are acceptable, usually 200-500mpbs download, about 300mpbs upload, ping 5ms, jitter 0, packet loss 0). In addition, the range of this Smart Wi-Fi Box is terrible - in the room directly behind the wall on which it hangs, the speed drops by about 50%.

Therefore, I want to give up the Smart Wi-Fi Box. I also want to completely disable wifi on Sagemcom (the modem is too far away anyway) and create a completely separate wifi network, based on my own devices, simply connected to Sagemcom. I suspect I will have 2 access points. The problem is that the electricians routed the cable from the modem to the upstairs corridor (let's call Access Point1) and from there, not from the modem, down the corridor to the ground floor (Access Point2). Therefore, I currently have these RJ's bridged on the first floor, and the Smart Wi-Fi Box is located on the ground floor, i.e. in Access Point 2, because we use the Internet more here.

I want to buy 2 devices that will create a mesh network:
- device1 (AP1) will be connected with a cable to the Orange modem and placed in the place of Access Point1 - it has a direct connection to the Internet. It is supposed to emit WiFi 2.4/5GHz mesh.
- device2 (AP2) will be connected with a cable to AP1. It is supposed to emit WiFi 2.4/5GHz mesh.

The problem for me is the first device. First of all, from what I've read, the mesh network is decentralized with one device connected to the internet, and in my case that device will be another (Orange) device. Secondly, it must have a switch property, because it must give me a signal to the other device.

PS1. If the cost of such a strange solution is much higher than the standard one, we will dig into the walls and add an additional cable from the modem to Access Point2, although out of laziness we would prefer to avoid digging, plastering and painting half the house on the way.

PS2. At home, all cables are cat 6, so there should be no problems with gigabit transmission. The sockets are also gigabit.

I am asking for help in choosing such devices so that this network can be implemented. I'm not interested in repeaters, because they create separate duplicate wifi networks with the same ssid and disconnect the session when switching between them.

Illustrative drawing for description:

The classic number of electricians, network cables run like electric ones ;-)

No mesh. You'll have radio communication between the APs through the ceiling, which sucks. Mesh is such a cunning repeater. And that's it.
do you want good? 1 Gbit/s cable from the modem to the AP on the first floor. But AP with two ports!! LAN. From the first AP to the second floor below with the second cable. The cable is 1Gbit/s. No mesh even comes close to that.

I recommend unify. Versions one the cheapest AC lite, the other in the version with 2 ports, probably Pro. More expensive but for years. 2.4/5Ghz versions.

Be aware that there is always a drop in speed behind even a single wall. Physics.

I won't (I'm a woman) have any radio communication through the ceiling. Where did this idea come from anyway?

One AP per floor, wired to the modem. On the ground floor there is a second AP, connected with a cable to the one from the upper floor. It is enough for the one on the first floor to have a built-in switch for 1 device - the one from Orange has something like that, so the requirement is probably not from outer space.

What you described is exactly what I wrote. With the change that instead of the mesh device you put repeaters (two). The LAN/RJ connection layout remains the same as in my solution. I've tried repeaters before and they didn't work. The connection with the client disconnected when switching between repeaters, which is unacceptable to me.

P.S. The decrease in speed is known, but 50% on one 12cm silk wall is rather an exaggeration. I'm still about 3-3.5m from the Orange box.

visenna wrote:

I won't (I'm a woman) have any radio communication through the ceiling. Where did this idea come from anyway?

One AP per floor, wired to the modem. On the ground floor there is a second AP, connected with a cable to the one from the upper floor. It is enough for the one on the first floor to have a built-in switch for 1 device - the one from Orange has something like that, so the requirement is probably not from outer space.

What you described is exactly what I wrote. With the change that instead of the mesh device you put repeaters (two). The LAN/RJ connection layout remains the same as in my solution. I've tried repeaters before and they didn't work. The connection with the client disconnected when switching between repeaters, which is unacceptable to me.

P.S. The decrease in speed is known, but 50% on one 12cm silk wall is rather an exaggeration. I'm still about 3-3.5m from the Orange box.

We are on the forum for you, not for Mr ;-)

The idea is that you wrote that you want a mesh network. The mesh network is peer-to-peer communication, but in practice the available products accomplish this by communicating between devices on the radio and do not require cables. The difference from repeaters is that it gets along even if you set up a bunch of devices in such a network.

I replied that since you have cables, you don't have to use the mesh solution. But I didn't read the post very carefully.

Unifi will also create one network with one name. But there are some protocols implemented to help with switching between APs. It's not full roaming, but better than hanging 2 separate APs.

Unifi AC light is slightly over PLN 300. The PRO version with 2 ports is about PLN 600. Instead of AC light, there can be an LR (long range) version. I don't know what the difference actually looks like.

You explain to me what a mesh network is, but the mesh network, as well as the network propagated by the repeater, can be done in two ways - either based on connecting to the wifi network and propagating what the repeater gets, or connecting via a cable to the modem. In fact, we even have transmitters that are based on the connection of the same current (assuming the same phase) between the transmitter and the modem. Mesh only means how WiFi will be propagated from the access point. However, it does not specify how the signal to the access point will be delivered. If you read (in which case, sorry for "Mr.", it customarily jumped ) my first message and you will look at the drawing I posted there, you can see that the mesh network points will be connected by cable (I even wrote "connected with a cable", and in the drawing in the legend cables are marked in blue). So I never assumed, do not assume and will not assume basing it on a radio signal passing through any ceilings and walls. A senseless waste of quality, speed and connection stability.

As for unifi, I'm still not sure. In the last 5 years I bought 3 repeaters, all of them are in the trash today, which is why I have a very bad opinion about repeaters in general - they sounded like a fairy tale, they worked like a nightmare. I'd rather pay 1 time, even 3 times as much and have something that works than fly 10 times over the cost and have something that I will be dissatisfied with.

Have you ever tested this Unifi personally? Doesn't actually break the session when switching between devices..? It sounds almost impossible considering that these are separate networks, separate connection handshake, e.g. udp. I'm afraid that I will spend PLN 900 in total and it will turn out that it also works badly, and I will not be able to return it (purchase for an IT company that I run at home, I do not have a 14-day return option for the personnel sector).

visenna wrote:

You explain to me what a mesh network is, but the mesh network, as well as the network propagated by the repeater, can be done in two ways - either based on connecting to the wifi network and propagating what the repeater gets, or connecting via a cable to the modem. In fact, we even have transmitters that are based on the connection of the same current (assuming the same phase) between the transmitter and the modem. Mesh only means how WiFi will be propagated from the access point. However, it does not specify how the signal to the access point will be delivered. If you read (in which case, sorry for "Mr.", it customarily jumped ) my first message and you will look at the drawing I posted there, you can see that the mesh network points will be connected by cable (I even wrote "connected with a cable", and in the drawing in the legend cables are marked in blue). So I never assumed, do not assume and will not assume basing it on a radio signal passing through any ceilings and walls. A senseless waste of quality, speed and connection stability.

As for unifi, I'm still not sure. In the last 5 years I bought 3 repeaters, all of them are in the trash today, which is why I have a very bad opinion about repeaters in general - they sounded like a fairy tale, they worked like a nightmare. I'd rather pay 1 time, even 3 times as much and have something that works than fly 10 times over the cost and have something that I will be dissatisfied with.

Have you ever tested this Unifi personally? Doesn't actually break the session when switching between devices..? It sounds almost impossible considering that these are separate networks, separate connection handshake, e.g. udp. I'm afraid that I will spend PLN 900 in total and it will turn out that it also works badly, and I will not be able to return it (purchase for an IT company that I run at home, I do not have a 14-day return option for the personnel sector).

Again. You don't want to build a mesh network. You want to have 2 APs connected to the main modem/switch. And since the cable to the second one runs through a 2-port switch built into the first device, it does not make it a mesh network.

I don't know mesh products (everyone talks to everyone) based on cables.

Unifi are not repeaters. Good quality AP and that's it.

Read on the Unifi website. They shortened the WiFi authorization procedure when switching between devices. You can always lose a packet without implementing full roaming, 802.11f or 802.11r, I don't know where the protocol is described. There are such WiFi devices, but what if your phones and laptops do not have it implemented.

If you want, I can go from top to bottom with ping in the evening and show the result. There are two AC lite hanging.

Ok, you're actually right, I don't need a mesh network here since I connect them by cable anyway and they have 100% efficiency. However, I was hoping that it would fix some of the problems with the network itself, but from what I read, it does not.

Your pinging won't do anything for me, it will just switch you to another network and keep pinging. It would give me more if you connected to anything (e.g. skype from the computer to skype in the room) and changed the access point to which the device you go to connects to. Will the skype connection break down ..? Will the device automatically switch to this second wifi? This second question is not as stupid as it sounds, because on my previous repeaters, manually clicking on the connection to the "new" wifi network did not help (and let's forget about the automatic one), I had to turn off and on the entire wifi module in my phone. It looked as if the device was assigned an IP from the old network, and because the name is repeated, it wanted to use the same IP and the repeater wanted to assign it a new one or vice versa - I don't remember. But I remember being on 3G all the time because I didn't notice it wasn't connecting me to WiFi. However, those repeaters cost PLN 200, so after these, taking into account the price, they are undoubtedly of a better class, time - undoubtedly more modern, and different technology, I hope it will be better here.

If you could do such a test for me, I would be very grateful (or reveal the result as you know).

visenna wrote:

Ok, you're actually right, I don't need a mesh network here since I connect them by cable anyway and they have 100% efficiency. However, I was hoping that it would fix some of the problems with the network itself, but from what I read, it does not.

Your pinging won't do anything for me, it will just switch you to another network and keep pinging. It would give me more if you connected to anything (e.g. skype from the computer to skype in the room) and changed the access point to which the device you go to connects to. Will the skype connection break down ..? Will the device automatically switch to this second wifi? This second question is not as stupid as it sounds, because on my previous repeaters, manually clicking on the connection to the "new" wifi network did not help (and let's forget about the automatic one), I had to turn off and on the entire wifi module in my phone. It looked as if the device was assigned an IP from the old network, and because the name is repeated, it wanted to use the same IP and the repeater wanted to assign it a new one or vice versa - I don't remember. But I remember being on 3G all the time because I didn't notice it wasn't connecting me to WiFi. However, those repeaters cost PLN 200, so after these, taking into account the price, they are undoubtedly of a better class, time - undoubtedly more modern, and different technology, I hope it will be better here.

If you could do such a test for me, I would be very grateful (or reveal the result as you know).

Yes, the computer will switch to the second radio on the second AP. Without any clicking. I never noticed any switching attraction. I usually don't pay attention to it.
Internet packets get lost sometimes. Protocols can eliminate this. Only the loss of many packets in a row will break, for example, skype connection. You'd have to ask them how long it takes for them to end the call.
I can do a AP test for you. Copying the file to a network drive (so TCP) and some skype, so probably UDP.

It's best to do it on a computer, because in a separate window there will be a ping, there will be a preview of the unifi controller showing which AP has how many connections. The controller is not required for operation, only the initial configuration of the whole. Although there are hardware controllers, this is how you manage hundreds of devices rather.

Thanks, I'm waiting for information, I care most about the UDP test

@visenna
You're mixing up the terms repeater, mesh and access point a bit. You need to mount two access points ( @m.jastrzebski advises you very well. Ideally, the AP supports fast roaming protocols, but the receiving device must also support such protocols. It is the client (e.g. phone) who chooses which AP to connect to and when. The fact that you were once accidentally connected to a 3G network is the phone's fault, not the station's. Fast roaming protocols are designed to prevent this problem (at least in theory). As for the range itself, sometimes one AP will cover a large house, and sometimes you have to install it in almost every room - it's a matter of wall construction and materials used. The brand of radio equipment is also of little importance here.
You have two choices:
1. Buy a professional radio set - 2 AP + controller (Cisco, HP, Aruba, Motorola) and roaming works perfectly there, and the controller can automatically detect such Skype and properly take care of the transmission quality. However, for such a set with licenses, prices start at two thousand (euro).
2. Buy mid-range equipment. Here you have, for example, the aforementioned Unifi UAP. In your situation, UAP AC Pro (two ports) + UAP AC LR will work. This is probably the best equipment in this price range.

Edit: I got equipment from Huawei for testing today (router, switches and just AP) and after the first switching on, a very positive impression. Corporate equipment at an affordable price for any major company, even the simplest models will be bought by Kowalski.

Well, I did a simple test.
2x Unifi AC Lite. Upstairs under the ceiling, and downstairs on the wall. Reinforced concrete ceiling.
A 5-year-old tablet is lying in the living room. Linked to 650mbit (i.e. AC and 5Ghz). Signal -52.
Behind the 25cm wall made of porotherm -72 links for less, sometimes half.
Ping to the tablet on the computer.
Hiking with a tablet up the stairs. The signal in the dashes drops, and near the second AP it jumps up. No sign of disconnection. On the computer, I see 1 ping lost and switched to the upper AP in AC mode.
Tablet to remote room (2 walls), same, one ping loss, but here switched to 2.4Ghz upper AP.
Copying a file over the network done at the same time did not stop.
Netflix didn't jam.

@m.jastrzebski Thanks for the test. I will try this solution.

@IC_Current That's why I'm here and asking, because I'm far from a network or hardware expert. As for what you said about the devices being their fault, that sounds logical, but would indicate that I was extremely unlucky as all my devices disconnected. I have never discussed the range of the device, I have never asked about the coverage or how much I will need and I have already written in this thread that it depends on the building material of the house. I think either I didn't write it clearly or you misunderstood what I wrote. Thank you for the information about fast roaming, I had not heard of it and I'm sure it will come in handy.

Since this is how you advertise Unifi UAP, I will try to give this solution a chance.

Thanks for the replies.

Added after 5 [hours] 27 [minutes]:

I read reviews and a lot of people write that you need to buy a controller or put it on linux. Will I need it at all if I don't care about VoIP/stats/intranet...? I just want to have 2 access points connected to my cables and have access to the internet with reasonable speeds. It doesn't seem too complicated to me, so I don't think I need to buy it for another 350 PLN?

The UniFi controller is software installed on a computer with Windows or Linux system, or on a specialized mini PC. It is needed to configure the AP, but is not required afterwards, i.e.:
1. You install the software on your home computer
2. You configure the AP from this software
3. You create (like any decent IT specialist) a copy of the configuration (zone)
4. You turn off the controller (program).
5. You start the controller when you need to make some change in the configuration (e.g. changing the password).

Using Unifi devices is not as easy as SOHO devices, but it also does not require special knowledge like enterprise devices. I can see that my friend thinks in a typical engineering way and can find information on the web, so she can handle the configuration as much as possible.

One more minor note. After installing the AP, install the WiFi Analyzer program on your phone and check the signal level in individual rooms. For the connection to work stably, it is best that the signal does not fall below -75dBm. The program will also be useful for checking on which channels foreign networks operate and how to configure channels in your own (wide channels mean high throughput, but also the risk of interference from foreign transmitters).

@IC_Current Can you actually disable this controller? I suggested AlAraf's statement and the szmalu's answer to https://www.ceneo.pl/43073161#tab=reviews (yes, I know it's lite, but the software is probably analogous or the same). It is true that I have a dusty raspberry pi 1 in the closet and I could put it on Raspbian, but I don't really want to pay for extra electricity for it non-stop. Admittedly, it seemed extremely strange to me, because I don't really understand why the controller would work all the time, but when one commentator complains and the other corrects it and they both claim that it must work all the time, I assumed it was.

With the channels, unfortunately, on average, a lot of them are occupied by neighbors, so when I buy equipment, I will choose the golden mean Well, life. But thanks for the post.

Professional sets (e.g. Cisco) really need a constantly turned on controller, because all operations and advanced calculations are performed in it.
In Unifi you can 100% disable the controller after configuration. Just remember to backup the zone, because once assigned AP will only work with one controller, then only reset to factory settings (quite complicated).

I confirm, the controller does not need to be turned on. It is needed for configuration, configuration backup (if you do not change this configuration, you can do it once) and AP firmware update. But, in home conditions, if something works, you don't need to update it often. The controller must be enabled for commercial use only. An example is a hot-spot where users are issued vouchers for periodic access. The second application, also rather commercial, is collecting statistics.
watch this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkt6mMWn5aI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuoelZW835Q
The firmware is, of course, different for different models - because what's inside is different, but the user interface is the same, and individual models can be combined with each other. E.g. newer with older, 2.4 GHz with 5 GHz, etc.
The devices test the environment and select the channels themselves, unless there is a huge crowd and nothing else can be found.

Hello.
I'll add something from myself. Once I had a sneak peek at Roaming on wifi. I've done a lot of testing on different networks.
To sum up.
1. If the requirement is very active roaming. So we switch dynamically along with the movement of the client and additionally without packet loss. It's Cisco (or their Meraki) or Motorola. From this, of course, cisco is easier to get. The price is not so terrible (as you look at stimulants) but the use of energy .... A solution for the very demanding. It works great in tests.

2. If we want roaming and we don't mind a small loss of packets. Actually the most common situation. Because in 95% of cases it is absolutely sufficient. For example, an audio call or audio plus picture allows such losses. Even in the very assumption, it flies on the UDP protocol, i.e. a protocol that "don't care that it lost a few packets along the way". What about other situations like copying files? Well, then we have TCP and lost will be repeated. Personally, I met the requirement of lossless roaming only in stories. Here, the aforementioned Ubiquiti, which I recommend myself, will do the trick.

2a. There is often information on the forums that ubiquiti switches better when it has the fast switching function turned off. I think it's just a bug in some version of the program.

2b. We are actually roaming all the time. This is handled by the operating system. If only the network names will be the same (SSID), whether windows or android or ios or macos etc. will switch by themselves. Maybe more sluggish than FastRoaming from ubiquiti, but it will switch.

If the equipment is good then the situation of interrupting the connection, e.g. audio VOIP (skype or something) should not take place. Unless, of course, we have too low signal quality. Then you know...

It is known when someone sets up a network in some "company", everything seems to work, but after the tests, he goes home and does not know how it actually works in the long run. I have ubiquiti UAP AC LITE at home in the amount of 4 pieces. And I've been using it for a few years. It's easy for me to catch when something doesn't work because I have more contact than, for example, in foreign installations. As for how Roaming works... Sometimes it's great - the wife walks through the house talking on FaceTime and you can see on the controller how she switches it. Sometimes it's not so good. The situation will especially concern the author!

Roaming programmers' assumptions must be taken into account. We have two situations. Or we want to cover a large area with the signal. Or in a small area, we want to have as few points as possible with a signal worse than very good. While ubiquiti works great in the first edition, not necessarily in the second. Why not? If we don't have a lot of "use" (as they call it) of a given access point, e.g. someone surfing the net from a phone or chatting via skype, it may turn out that they won't switch us quickly, because they simply decide that it's not needed. If we start to use a lot, or we have a lot of customers and the points are heavily loaded, the switching occurs faster. And it wouldn't be surprising if it wasn't for the fact that it sometimes fails. If I have a voice connection via the Internet (VoIP) and I move quickly around the house, sometimes this "lazy" switching unfortunately spoils the case and suddenly the connection starts to fail. You may ask if cisco is better. It's hard for me to say here. Because I had no opportunity to check it in such a densely packed place (it would simply be too expensive). I think it can be better, although I will not give my head because this laziness of switching in cisco is also there. For example. A long corridor and two points on it. Sometimes you have to get really close to the next one to switch. If I was moving fast enough, would the switching keep up.... I don't know, I can't run that fast

@crashbit Thanks for the extensive description, at least I know what to expect

@crashbit Thanks for the extensive description, at least I know what to expect :-)

Added after 44 [seconds]:

Ubiquiti purchase.