Re: Network hardware.
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012, peasthope@shaw.ca wrote:
> We have a Linksys WRT54G in a community hall and want to extend
> the range. Candidate devices are the Linksys RE1000 and the
> PLWK400. The PLWK400 is just a PLE400 and PLW400 together.
>
> 1. Which if any of these things uses the 110 V wiring as an antenna?
PLE400, PLW400.
The power wiring is not used as an antenna, it is used to directly transmit
signals. The wiring does leak eletromagnetic noise because of the powerline
transmission, but this is not an useful function, it is an undesireable side
effect.
Do note that you need to connect the PLE400 and PLW400 to the *same
electrical circuit* (i.e. below the same circuit breaker), and that it will
not always work well when you have other electrical noise sources around.
> 2. Does the PLW400 communicate directly with a router or through
> the PLE400?
Yes.
http://homekb.cisco.com/Cisco2/ukp.aspx?vw=1&docid=8d90197164e74fc6a784923edb26df6d_Setting_up_a_wireless_network_with_the_PLWK400.xml
> 3. For simply extending the range of a wireless router, does the
> PLWK400 have any advantage over the RE1000?
Probably yes. The information on the PLW400 is not clear enough, but it
really should be acting as a standalone AP, and therefore it is supposed to
be far better than the bridging the RE1000 does (especially with a 802.11g
device like the WRT54G).
However, please be advised that it would be better to use CAT5e ethernet
wiring and several access points directly connected to a central router,
instead. Powerline transmission is much worse a source of eletromagnetic
noise than fast ethernet over CAT5e cabling (especially if you use CAT5e STP
cabling), and it is much more succeptible to outside interference as well
(when compared to properly installed CAT5e STP cabling).
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: