Extending wireless ~300 ft?

[korndawg]

I currently own the Linksys WRT54GL router and have cable internet service. I have a shop behind my place that I want to hook a second computer up to. The shop is approx 300ft away and brick, but has some large windows. As it stands now, I cant connect wirelessly when I'm in the shop so I'm wondering what u think the best way to remedy my situation would be. Last resort, I could exta coax to the shop, but would much rather do it thru wireless if possible. Thanks.

Also, I have a centrino laptop with built in wireless so I'm sure that hurts my range.

 

[JackMDS]

Welcome to AnandTech Forums.

Maybe this can Help, Wireless Bridging - http://www.ezlan.net/bridging.html

 

[korndawg]

Thanks. I'm a total noob at networking

 

[thecoolnessrune]

300ft. is doable with wireless G outdoors, and even more doable with Wireless N.

If you're still not getting reception, replacing the duck antennas on each unit with directional antennas or home-made "cantennas" should do you just fine.

 

[JackMDS]

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
300ft. is doable with wireless G outdoors, and even more doable with Wireless N.

This is Not accurate. If the user end up that there is a need for more types of Wireless Hardware it might be impossible to do it with Draft_N since additional Wireless devices other the Routers and Client cards are Not really available at Market

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: JackMDS

Originally posted by: thecoolnessrune
300ft. is doable with wireless G outdoors, and even more doable with Wireless N.

This is Not accurate. If the user end up that there is a need for more types of Wireless Hardware it might be impossible to do it with Draft_N since additional Wireless devices other the Routers and Client cards are Not really available at Market

What are you referring to that isn't accurate? 300ft. outdoors is the maximum theoretical capability of G. Draft N does extend that distance ability by quite a bit. Obviously though if the device does not support Draft N then the device can't be run in Draft N mode. Same as if a B device was put on the network. If you put a B device on a G network then it will only run in B mode and be limited to B limitations. What's the issue in that?

 

[JackMDS]

I am Not talking about the obvious compatibility needs. I am talking about selection of Directional, or high dbi Antennae, Access Point in Client Mode, Bridges, and other hardware that might be needed to extend Wireless distance.

Since it is a Draft hardware the vendor do not want to risk getting caught with too many device that might Not be compatible with the 802.11n standard when it comes out. Thus the Draft_N devices are restricted to mainly Routers and client cards.

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: korndawg
Also, I have a centrino laptop with built in wireless so I'm sure that hurts my range.

Even with a high gain directional antenna at the router that may present a problem. The bridging that people were talking about would require a big antenna on the receiving end as well, as already suggested. It's pretty unlikely that the laptop on its own would work reliably (or at all) at 300 ft, even with a powerful antenna at the router.

What's in between your house and your shop? If it's your own land, you perhaps could just simply run a single long outdoor Ethernet cable underground. The cable itself would be under $100, for a cable that is waterproof and can be buried. (This cable can be very hard to find locally, but is easily found online. Look for "direct burial", "gel-filled", or "flooded" cable.) However, if there are other structures in the way or if you have cement there then that obviously poses a problem.

Yeah, it can be a hassle to bury 300 feet of cable, but it will give you Gigabit file transfer speeds, and it will be 100% reliable, unlike wireless.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Eug

Originally posted by: korndawg
Also, I have a centrino laptop with built in wireless so I'm sure that hurts my range.

Even with a high gain directional antenna at the router that may present a problem. The bridging that people were talking about would require a big antenna on the receiving end as well, as already suggested. It's pretty unlikely that the laptop on its own would work reliably (or at all) at 300 ft, even with a powerful antenna at the router.

What's in between your house and your shop? If it's your own land, you perhaps could just simply run a single long outdoor Ethernet cable underground. The cable itself would be under $100, for a cable that is waterproof and can be buried. (This cable can be very hard to find locally, but is easily found online. Look for "direct burial", "gel-filled", or "flooded" cable.) However, if there are other structures in the way or if you have cement there then that obviously poses a problem.

Yeah, it can be a hassle to bury 300 feet of cable, but it will give you Gigabit file transfer speeds, and it will be 100% reliable, unlike wireless.

+1

 

[ccbadd]

I do have to agree with JackMDS that Draft N is not a good choice for site to site wireless links, stick with G and use proper antennaes. I would suggest, however, that you consider testing a pair of powerline adapters. If you have a spare outlet that is on the same 110VAC leg as an outlet in the shop, you could easily get 50-100mbps (maybe more) and not need any additional wiring. I have done this to some houses to get access in a garage and it has worked great.

 

[Eug]

That's a good point. It didn't even occur to me that they could be on the same AC. If so, then powerline networking might be quick and simple. At that distance with half decent wiring you usually would be able to get speeds that can at least max out your internet access.

I actually have powerline networking going out to a structure about 150 feet away. My speeds aren't great, but it's good enough for surfing. As mentioned would be necessary, it's all on the same AC as the house, and the wiring is fairly good as it was all built less than 10 years ago.

However, I would only recommend the "200 Mbps" equipment. It is reportedly the most reliable, and people say that it can sometimes work when the 85 Mbps equipment doesn't work at all. (I personally have only ever used the 200 Mbps equipment. I have no experience with the 85 Mbps equipment.)

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Originally posted by: Eug
That's a good point. It didn't even occur to me that they could be on the same AC. If so, then powerline networking might be quick and simple. At that distance with half decent wiring you usually would be able to get speeds that can at least max out your internet access.

I actually have powerline networking going out to a structure about 150 feet away. My speeds aren't great, but it's good enough for surfing. As mentioned would be necessary, it's all on the same AC as the house, and the wiring is fairly good as it was all built less than 10 years ago.

However, I would only recommend the "200 Mbps" equipment. It is reportedly the most reliable, and people say that it can sometimes work when the 85 Mbps equipment doesn't work at all. (I personally have only ever used the 200 Mbps equipment. I have no experience with the 85 Mbps equipment.)

I concur. The Netgear 200mbps units are available for $110 from PcNation. A bit pricey to step into, but a better deal me thinks than trying to get wireless to work (which in itself can get pricey).

If the outlets are on the same circuit you just connect the plugs up on each end. On the house end you run a network cable from the plug to the router, and on the shed end you rune a network cable from your plug to your second router set up as a bridge. The wireless will then work in that general area.

Of course your best option is still to bury a cable, but if you dont want to do that this is still your best option.

 

[Eug]

The only issue with burial of network cable is lightning strikes. I've been looking at burying several hundred feet of Ethernet cable but would prefer to add a lightning protector in-line. They're not very expensive (2-digit $), but need to be grounded to work properly. Otherwise, in the case of a lightning strike, it could fry your network.

 

[drebo]

Wireless-G is perfectly capable of going 300 feet or more outside. If this is for business purposes, I'd recommend either trenching a cable or purchasing a business-grade solution such as Cisco Aironets. If it's a home solution, a couple of routers running DDWRT with 3rd party high-gain antennae (check Bountiful Networks), one in Client Bridge mode, should be more than sufficient. 300ft is not that far.

 

[kevnich2]

Originally posted by: Eug
The only issue with burial of network cable is lightning strikes. I've been looking at burying several hundred feet of Ethernet cable but would prefer to add a lightning protector in-line. They're not very expensive (2-digit $), but need to be grounded to work properly. Otherwise, in the case of a lightning strike, it could fry your network.

The cheapest, safest way your going to get this done is with buried fiber optic cable. It may seem more expensive but it's really not. If your already digging a trench, just order some fiber optic cable and a fiber to ethernet converter for the ends and be done. Since you probably don't want to terminate yourself, get some fiber with the ends already on an just make sure your fiber to ethernet converter has similar connectors on it. This is my way of linking up all remote buildings anyway because it's just easier than putting lightning protection on ethernet cables.

 

[kevnich2]

Originally posted by: drebo
Wireless-G is perfectly capable of going 300 feet or more outside. If this is for business purposes, I'd recommend either trenching a cable or purchasing a business-grade solution such as Cisco Aironets. If it's a home solution, a couple of routers running DDWRT with 3rd party high-gain antennae (check Bountiful Networks), one in Client Bridge mode, should be more than sufficient. 300ft is not that far.

Yes, 300' is doable by wireless. I would say go with G with 2 access points with directional antennas on both ends facing each other. 300 feet is easy with that, just make sure you have the right equipment.

 

[Eug]

Originally posted by: kevnich2

The cheapest, safest way your going to get this done is with buried fiber optic cable. It may seem more expensive but it's really not. If your already digging a trench, just order some fiber optic cable and a fiber to ethernet converter for the ends and be done. Since you probably don't want to terminate yourself, get some fiber with the ends already on an just make sure your fiber to ethernet converter has similar connectors on it. This is my way of linking up all remote buildings anyway because it's just easier than putting lightning protection on ethernet cables.

How much does such a fibre setup cost?

Also, in my setup it would be a problem. The end of the line would actually be physically outside. The reason I'm considering doing that is to put an outdoor IP camera at the end of my property. Not only that, it'd be nice to have Power over Ethernet to the camera.