Those experts that Redvin was demanding - I need you!

[whoololon]

In my case, and I present it as something indicative, I use a normal 5e cable of 20m prefabricated (12 €), it runs along half a wall, borders a door (always behind the cover) until behind a showcase, drill from the 10 and striker on baseboard to the adjoining room, it follows half a wall behind a wardrobe, borders another door only up to the lintel, new drill at that height until my room, borders door, follows the wall, corner and half wall more until the equipment.

Simply, know that the connector measures almost 12 mm and must be wrapped with insulating tape so as not to damage it when passing the hole.

[Plok]

I understand you, as I have been in that situation several times, and it's not because I don't have the means, I mean tools, but once I have the conduit, I don't like to put it superficially.

You should know that when the Movistar technician came, I was not only the first to receive fiber in my block and in my urbanization, but in the town it belongs to, and I forced the technician (with my help because they come alone, since they are subcontracted self-employed) to look for the conduits from the stairwell box to the back room where the PC is, and it turned out great. The other neighbors didn't even bother to look for the tubes, they put it on the wall with staples and even on the stairs (because I didn't see it as I am the president) also on the wall in a sloppy format, with how easy it is to use the copper pair to hook up the fiber and pass it.

So before reaching that solution through walls (which I don't rule out if there is no other way) I will try to find another solution, perhaps the one with a double booster and an antenna in the hallway, but what I would like is for someone to explain to me how MIMO routers work, in which I suppose that the 2 antennas must be exactly the same to not unbalance the signal...

[whoololon]

MIMO is not something new, it's just being advertised as the latest thing, usually in devices where not having it would make no difference.
It's based on signal offsetting, allowing occasional reflections to increase its coverage. But for this to work, devices must support the "n" standard, because if they're "b" or "g" we'll find a reduction in coverage (as they're not capable of restructuring the offset packets).
However, for WiFi to reach a data rate of at least 300 Mb/s with 2T2R (2 transmitting and 2 receiving antennas), the channel width must be 40 MHz, and I'm pretty sure the Vomistar's Mirastar offers a channel width of 20 MHz, so the data transfer rate won't go beyond 150 Mb/s.

Apparently, if it detects nearby networks it doesn't matter that you set it to 40 MHz manually, it goes back down to 20 MHz.

…yes, that router looks like a paperweight with an antenna and lights. Sorry.

[Plok]

Well, I'm afraid you're absolutely right, this router is a disaster.

Regarding nearby networks, I can't avoid them as I live in a block of 16 neighbors with some influence from the neighboring block.

The thing is, as I told you, I was the first to have fiber, and I made the mistake of recommending it to my neighbors, since I have quite a following when it comes to technical matters (I'm a retired mechanical-electronic technician from the days when HW was repaired, but I'm up to speed with SW) and now I'm surrounded by signals, almost all 802.11n. Fortunately, I have a program called Xirrus that locates all the channels around me, and I try to put myself on a channel that has as much free space as possible in front of and behind it.

Now I have 3 neighbors on channel 11 (one.11g and another.11n, the closest ones with 60% and 58%), 3 on channel 1, 1 on channel 2, 2 on channel 6, 1 on channel 10, and me on channel 8 with 100%.

I have a laptop, and the maximum speed I see on WiFi is 130 Mbps, even when I put it in front of the antennas.

Thank you very much for enlightening me about MIMO, because I had no idea or only a vague idea, but I don't understand: When it receives the signal from a laptop or a mobile or tablet that transmit in.11n or.11g, they will do so with a single antenna. How does that work?

[whoololon]

First, let's download some iron about the Mirastar mentioned. It's not that it's a paperweight, it's just that it could be better.

I'm going to try to go step by step, trying not to get too confused.
For a mobile phone or a tablet, we'll agree that the most important thing is coverage, since they usually don't require much bandwidth, also ignoring the fact that their hardware is quite limited.
As we move to more powerful equipment, like a laptop, speed will start to be equally important. The protocol thing is the controller's thing and is usually compatible with a/b/g/n, as for the antennas, it depends on the type of device and manufacturer: generally, phones and tablets have one WiFi antenna, while a laptop usually has two.
But that's not what we're here for. Ideally, with a laptop and on WiFi, we should be able to reach the speed we have contracted. But this is very complicated since the "Wi-Fi Alliance" protocol states that if there are adjacent networks, it automatically switches to a "non-aggressive" channel width of 20 Mhz, (each channel has a range of 5 Mhz) which limits our connection to 130 Mb/s anyway. With a channel width of 40 Mhz and neighbors around, it would cause interference in their connections, which is why some people opt to switch from 2.4 Ghz to 5 Ghz… which are also not without sin as they offer less coverage area.
To sum up and be specific: 2.4 channels with a width of 40 Mhz are, today, a panacea. For WiFi, I could almost say that everyone goes to 130 Mb/s unless they live quite isolated, their router allows the forced 40 Mhz mode or they have modified the router's firmware (in both cases violating the IEEE 802.11-2012 standard :rollani:) or are bluffing. The solution: switch to 5 Ghz, bearing in mind that not all the devices we have will be compatible (802.11 ac) and their coverage range is less.

It's convenient to check which channel the adjacent networks are broadcasting on, and thus choose one that is far from the range.

Now, what brings us here, the bandwidth or the lack of coverage? If it's the former, I tried to clarify it above, if it's the latter, it's even higher up. ;D

Sorry for the wall of text.:wall:

[Plok]

Yes... It's not the broadband that's the issue, it's the coverage and I take good note of your proposed solutions.

By the way, what brand and model of router do you think would be good to replace this crap put in by MStar? If it has screw-on antennas, the better the better.

For me the issue remains open to anyone who can contribute something that ADDS to what has been written. Thank you.

[whoololon]

Asus rt-ac87u ac2400

[Plok]

Damn, man! That router you're suggesting me costs more than 200 €urazos! I think that's amazing…

On the other hand, I think I might have the solution to my problem so I don't have to run a cable over and through walls, and the possible solution was given to me by one of my sons who is very "gamer". He can only have 10 Mbps of speed for the moment, well actually 6.5, and he can't put in fiber because he has a permanence contract I'm not sure with Orange currently, although fiber passes in front of his house, but when Movistar put the router with the TRIO, he complained because he demanded to have the same coverage as before with ADSL and they put 3 PLC's through the electrical network (they were going to bill him 300€ but in the end he didn't have to pay) so he has one next to the router connected with an RJ45 and in a plug and another next to the PC and the third one upstairs. Maybe I'll try that although I won't be able to get the same deal.

Isn't that a possible solution?

[Espinetenbolas]

I haven't had a PLC or messed with them, but depending on the electrical installation, it can work well or be a disaster... it also depends on the model, but I don't see it as a definitive solution... mainly because it either won't work and you'll discard it, or it will work but then you'll have other problems

You can also try changing the modem's location by splicing the fiber optic cable, but I'm not aware of the material and economic feasibility of such a feat, but it's all about being informed

[whoololon]

I don't recommend messing around with fiber optics. Just the fusion splicer costs €2000, and then there's the cutter and the stripper... it's better to call someone who has them and can do it.

I see it clearly: if you already have the RJ45 crimping tool, I don't even think about it: I pull Ethernet cable, set up an access point and take advantage of a router we already have and can still provide that service.
What about doing (more) drilling? Use the corrugated tube for that. Then we check with the multimeter that no pole has broken along the way and it's time to crimp. No cable is so bad (if in good condition) that it suffers a significant signal loss in 15 or 20 m. In fact, the maximum length for a cat6 is about 50 m for 10GBaseT, and a maximum of 100m for 10 to 1000BaseT. Neither are 25 m insurmountable for a cat5, no matter how many curves and bends it has to cross.

In no way do we want to change detergents, because we have PLC solutions with WiFi from around €60, which, as Espinete says, may work well or not... but I add that we always have the right of withdrawal (14 calendar days from the purchase), if for one reason or another the issue doesn't convince us.

Anyway, good luck.

[Magog]

Easy and cheap option: keep the Zyxel. You enter the Zyxel, configure it with the IP 192.168.1.2 (I put this because the fiber one excludes from 2 to 33 and so another device will never step on it) and you disable the DHCP. You connect any port of the fiber one to any port of the Zyxel and ready, it keeps the previous network.
I see that whoololon had written more or less that. I replied without reading, I don't have much time lately.

Best regards.

[Fassou]

Magog! lucky eyes

[Plok]

I can't even think about reforming the fiber optic.

On Monday I'll stop by Media Markt to see what they have, although I've already seen something online. The doubt I have is whether it would be better for me to have a PLC at the electrical outlet and another one at the outlet with WiFi and a plug, since I could put it in the living room in the outlet of an air conditioning unit, or put it without WiFi and put the Zyxel router as a transmitter, and if it doesn't work well, as whololon says, I'll change it and look for another solution.

But another doubt that just occurred to me regarding the use of Zyxel as a transmitter is that this router is type.11bg at 54 Mbps and yet the signal that would enter it would be.11bgn of at least 130 Mbps that couldn't come out, right?

And if the PLC were type.11ac at 5 Ghz, it would be better, since in the living room there won't be many walls to dampen the signal.

[whoololon]

As shown in the guide for creating an access point with that same router, the connection to it is made using a data cable, so you would have the maximum contracted bandwidth, obviously the data transmission capacity via WiFi from there is conditioned by the type of network it supports, 802.11g in this specific case.

The PLC model is a matter of taste and requirements, just remember that to broadcast at a frequency of 5 GHz (802.11ac) we must be sure that the rest of our devices are compatible with said environment (minimum 802.11n), and that its coverage range is less than in 2.4 GHz.

Edit: To recommend, Devolo dLAN 1200+ WiFi AC. Important to connect it directly to a wall outlet never to a power strip, even less so if it has surge protection.

[Plok]

I'll keep that in mind. I think everything that would have access via WiFi, laptops, phones, and tablets in my house, are all.11bgn. And something like that, just, I had been looking on the Internet, but not that expensive! Of course, the same thing wasn't with WiFi.11ac and 1Gb. And from what I can see, there's not much of this type to choose from and they usually don't specify the type of WiFi, so I guess if they don't specify that it's AC, it will be N.

[Mystique]

Plok, I think that if you don't want to run cables and decide to go with a PLC setup, it's better to get one with wifi and forget about the other router.

Nowadays, PLCs with wifi are very configurable, even more so than many routers.
There's also the issue of consumption, with PLC+Wifi you have a single device, and with PLC and router, the consumption of the router and the PLC together will be higher. It's not a big difference, but at the price of electricity...
And the last thing is the simplicity of installation and wiring. With the PLC with wifi, you just have to plug it into the wall and you're done. With the router, you have more size and wiring

Cons of the PLC, sometimes one of the two gets stuck and you have to unplug it for it to work again. But well, like almost everything

[whoololon]

When I mentioned that PLC with WiFi were available from 60 €, I took as a reference a TP-Link model (TP-LINK TL-WPA4220KIT) with 802.11n (2.4 to 2.4835GHz) with Ethernet 10/100, offered as a kit (one main device and one supplementary) and without female plug. Theoretical maximums 300 Mb/s in wireless mode, 500 Mb/s via Ethernet.

I repeat that I took it as a reference only for the price, not as a purchase recommendation.

[Plok]

@Mystique:

Plok, I think that if you don't want to run cables and decide to go with a PLC setup, it's better to get one with WiFi and forget about the other router.

Nowadays, PLCs with WiFi are very configurable, even more so than many routers.
There's also the matter of consumption; with PLC+WiFi you have a single device, and with PLC and router, the consumption of the router and PLC together will be higher. It's not a huge difference, but with the price of electricity...
And last is the simplicity of installation and wiring. With the PLC with WiFi, you just plug it into the wall and you're done. With the router, you have more size and wiring

Cons of the PLC, sometimes one of the two gets stuck and you have to unplug it to get it working again. But well, like almost everything

Well, all that you say to me, it reaffirms me in the idea of the PLC and you're right about the router, it's another device to consume electricity.

@whoololon:

When I mentioned that PLCs with WiFi were found starting at 60 €, I took as a reference a TP-Link model (TP-LINK TL-WPA4220KIT) with 802.11n (2.4 a 2.4835GHz) with Ethernet 10/100, offered as a kit (one main device and one supplementary) and without female outlet. Theoretical maximums 300 Mb/s in wireless mode, 500 Mb/s via Ethernet.

I repeat that I took it as a reference only for the price, not as a purchase recommendation.

Well, it's that as if you had put honey on my lips with this Devolo dLAN 1200+ WiFi AC, because no matter how much I look for a similar pair cheaper, (1Gbit, AC, with outlets and dual LAN output) I just can't see another brand, and this one is 164 €… There are others but they always lack something.

[whoololon]

Let's get specific, I think that will be best.
Being practical and realistic, in an urban environment, the only way to achieve the maximum contracted bandwidth is through the Ethernet cable, preferably in a GigaE network.
Through WiFi, we are not going to even get close to 600 Mb/s (theoretical maximum) or even 300 Mb/s., no matter how many N's it has; we would be lucky if we could get 150 Mb/s., since it will work with the MCS of the slowest device in the network and with a channel width of 20 Mhz. because of the issue with adjacent networks, as I already explained.

Getting an /ac transmitter so that it ends up working in /n compatibility is throwing money away.

Disregarding the access point issue and looking for something efficient but more hedonic, I would recommend the Devolo DLAN 500 Starter Kit, WiFi N which costs around 80 € with VAT.

[Plok]

Well, folks, the die has been cast.

This morning I stopped by Media Markt to see what they had, and among the ones with WiFi, I found the no-nonsense option at a better price than I expected, which was around 164 euros from Amazon. The curious thing is that Media Markt advertises this PLC on its website for 179 €

I bought a pair of DEVOLO dLAN 1200 WiFi-AC, for **140 €**uros, so I've already connected it (very easy to do in a few steps well illustrated in the manual: 1º plug in the transmitter; 2º Connect the RJ45 cable to a port on the router; 3º point the remote's WiFi-AC key; 4º Plug in the remote (in my case in a socket in the AA 30 cm from the ceiling and in the middle of the living room); 5º After 2 minutes, press the transmitter button and 6º go to the device (mobile, tablet, etc.) and where devolo-959 appears, enter the key and connect ¡¡Tatachánnn!! in the living room and with my S6 mobile, the signal is'very strong', in the kitchen'strong' and 234 Mbps.

It's curious, in front of the router, with my mobile, and selecting the router as the WiFi source, I have a'very strong' signal but it doesn't give me more than 144 Mbps. Without moving from the spot, I connect the Devolo and I have a'strong' signal at almost 9 m. and 234 Mbps. That's where you can see the crap router that these TrincaStar people have put in.

So here you have a good reference of how to extend the WiFi network without pulling cables, of course, spending the not insignificant amount of 140 €. There are cheaper devices, but I set the bar very high thanks to (Whoololon) for looking for WiFi AC, Gbit, both devices with a plug, which is very practical because I have reused the transmitter by plugging in a wireless phone charger again and in the WiFi one, an AA device.; it also has a couple of Lan sockets, which will normally be unused but could eventually be used to connect a laptop and/or a tablet and have 300 Mbps or almost.