Re: Help needed with home network configuration
On Sun, 8 Apr 2018 00:32:05 -0000 (UTC)
Dan Purgert <email@example.com> wrote:
> David Wright wrote:
> > On Sat 07 Apr 2018 at 20:17:56 (-0000), Dan Purgert wrote:
> >> David Wright wrote:
> >> > On Fri 06 Apr 2018 at 16:26:47 (-0000), Dan Purgert wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> It's a nuance in the semantics of what it means to "repeat" wifi.
> >> >> Suffice to say, in order to "repeat" wifi, you have one radio splitting
> >> >> its time between pretending to be an AP for a client device, and
> >> >> pretending to be a client device to the upstream AP.
> >> >
> >> > Then I'm not sure why you wrote "Good deal". I'd be wanting the
> >> > wireless connectivity described above as not needed, though obviously
> >> > on a separate band/channel. Were you implying that that would kill
> >> > throughput for everything too?
> >> If he's using the buffalo device to "repeat" the wifi signal (which he
> >> isn't), then yes the throughput would tank.
> > OK, I'll just assume you don't know. Anybody else actually doing this
> > (separate band (like 2/5 GHz) or channel (like channel 1/6/11) for the
> > backhaul (inter-router) link)?
> If you have a device repeating a WiFi signal, it *will* use the same
> channel as the upstream AP. It *cannot* use a different channel.
> In the event you have a dual-band AP, and the following conditions are
> - 5GHz uplink
> - 2.4 GHz for clients
> Then you are not "repeating" the WiFi signal to the downstream client
> devices (and the throughput losses I mentioned would not come into
There are also apparently some units (even consumer grade ones), that
have two diferent radios both on (different) 5 GHz bands, so one could
use one for client access and one for uplink (although I have no
experience with this):