Networking between 2 buildings 1000 feet apart

[GroundedSailor]

Our office and shop are about 1000 feet apart There are 4 houses in between our 2 buildings. The setting is very rural and along a creek.

What I'd like to do is extend the office network to the shop to achieve these goals:
- Provide internet access to the shop so that the shop guys can connect their computers to the server (located at the office).
- Use an IP camera based security system at the shop which can be monitored/recorded at the office.
- Extend the office telephone system to have 2 shop extensions. Right now we use cell phones.
- For future use when we start using some kind of barcode inventory system to manage our equipment.

I looked at Trendnet's Outdoor Access Point.

What I'm thinking is:
- Set up one of these units on a pole outside the office building. Will have to run about 100 feet of Ethernet cable from the switch to the AP.
- Have another unit outside the shop on a pole. Run about 50 feet of ethernet cable to a small room inside the shop where I can install a switch and a wireless AP.
- Somehow make sure they are looking directly at each other. Is there any equipment/tester I can get to do this?

Questions
1. Am I thinking along the right track? Will these Trendnet units be good for the distance or should I look at something stronger?

2. What equipment will I need to piggyback the telephone connections? We're using an Avaya system.

3. What type of ethernet cable should be used for the outdoor runs?

I'm kinda new to this stuff and appreciate any assistance.

Thanks.


.

 

[rudeguy]

be very careful with the telephone part. Having the correct 911 address is a big deal

 

[imagoon]

In most cases, trenching in fiber is the best answer for businesses (especially since you are talking voice, half duplex wireless with more than a couple phones won't handle it all that well). If you own all the land in the middle, the armored fiber in the ground will typically last for years / decades and be completely upgradable as well as be the safest (IE glass doesn't conduct transient voltages etc.)

You bury 4 pair armored fiber cable and then interconnect the building with that. Wireless can work ok but it also can be interfered with. Also the AP you linked is a omnidirectional so there is minimal if any aiming unless you use the external antenna port.

 

[drebo]

Fiber's best, but there are other ways.

For wireless, I'd recommend Ubiquiti Nanostations. They'll get 1000ft just fine and will give you close to 100mbps. And they're way cheap. You will need line of sight, however.

Regarding the phones, you can use some ATAs (media gateways) back to back to extend the analog ports from your Avaya across the wireless bridge. A 2-port FXS gateway in the shop and then a 2-port FXO gateway in the office. Most will do direct IP dialing, so no need for a SIP proxy or anything like that.

Or if your Avaya system is SIP-enabled already, a 2-port FXS gateway will work just fine.

 

[GroundedSailor]

In most cases, trenching in fiber is the best answer for businesses (especially since you are talking voice, half duplex wireless with more than a couple phones won't handle it all that well). If you own all the land in the middle, the armored fiber in the ground will typically last for years / decades and be completely upgradable as well as be the safest (IE glass doesn't conduct transient voltages etc.)

You bury 4 pair armored fiber cable and then interconnect the building with that. Wireless can work ok but it also can be interfered with. Also the AP you linked is a omnidirectional so there is minimal if any aiming unless you use the external antenna port.

We thought about fiber and that did appeal as the way to go, but we don't own any land in between the office and the shop. We even though of dropping a cable in the creek but that is not practical.

.

 

[alkemyst]

A 1000 foot fiber run is ridiculously expensive. Wireless is the way to go for this with line-of-sight. The bandwidth is much better than a typical WAP. drebo's other details are basically how you will need to do the rest.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Fiber's best, but there are other ways.

For wireless, I'd recommend Ubiquiti Nanostations. They'll get 1000ft just fine and will give you close to 100mbps. And they're way cheap. You will need line of sight, however.

Regarding the phones, you can use some ATAs (media gateways) back to back to extend the analog ports from your Avaya across the wireless bridge. A 2-port FXS gateway in the shop and then a 2-port FXO gateway in the office. Most will do direct IP dialing, so no need for a SIP proxy or anything like that.

Or if your Avaya system is SIP-enabled already, a 2-port FXS gateway will work just fine.

I'm not familiar with the media gateways, will have to research these. Are they plug and play units or will they need to be configured?

Another product I came across is this 900 mhz wireless bridge.

Was this model of Ubiquiti what you had in mind?

Thanks

.

 

[drebo]

Yes, the NanoStation would work. If you wanted a bit more signal, you could upgrade to the NanoBridge. You have to be careful with 900mhz, a lot of municipalities have started using 900mhz for their water meters. There may be significant interference. It does, however, rely quite a bit less on line of sight. Throughput will be lower, though.

The media gateways do need to be configured. If you don't know much about SIP, you might consider hiring someone to do it for you.

 

[bobdole369]

with line-of-sight

This is exceedingly critical. Are you in the great white north and can physically see the other building now? How about in the middle of summer?

There are 4 houses in between our 2 buildings

How "in-between" are they? You will need to physically "see" a clear, non-obstructed by buildings, terrain, foliage, or land, path to the other side.

along a creek

Believe it or not - if your signal path goes over water or otherwise encounters anything in the way - or just to the side of a laserbeam style path - you will experience an effect. See http://www.zytrax.com/tech/wireless/fresnel.htm for a very good explanation.

Your best bet is to erect a mast - several dozen feet higher than the tallest terrain or obstacle on both sides. Note that you'll need to ground the shit out the mast, (just being in the ground itself isn't enough, you'll need flashing or braid, and several 8ft ground rods in a pattern around the mast - and you'll need to use lightning arrestors on the power cable (if the device chosen isn't POE), Ethernet cable, and anything else on the mast that eventually enters the building.

I just replace an 800 foot link using 3com outdoor building-to-building bridges with a cable/dsl (primary/backup) system (in both locations)- over a gre/ipsec tunnel. This is how the telecoms want you to fix this problem.

 

[drebo]

Grounding isn't actually THAT important. Remember, if lightning has no path to ground (such as through a wooden pole), it won't try. There are many WISPs that don't ground their equipment, specifically for this reason.

My opinion is that the structure itself isn't as important as grounding the equipment with lightning arrestors. That said, the power injector on Ubiquiti gear does a pretty good job of it.

 

[imagoon]

Grounding isn't actually THAT important. Remember, if lightning has no path to ground (such as through a wooden pole), it won't try. There are many WISPs that don't ground their equipment, specifically for this reason.

My opinion is that the structure itself isn't as important as grounding the equipment with lightning arrestors. That said, the power injector on Ubiquiti gear does a pretty good job of it.

Um no. At the power levels of lightning, wood is a great conductor. There is a reason lightning tends to strike trees... In addition your power becomes ground. One of the simple rules is that lightning always finds a path to ground.

Fiber conducts at those voltages also.

 

[drebo]

Um no. At the power levels of lightning, wood is a great conductor. There is a reason lightning tends to strike trees... In addition your power becomes ground. One of the simple rules is that lightning always finds a path to ground.

Fiber conducts at those voltages also.

Either way, never had a problem and likely never will.

Of course, the OP's location could be more suseptible than ours. We've got 160-foot towers with no grounding and never had an issue.

Bottom line is that if lightning strikes your equipment, you're going to be replacing it regardless of whether or not it's grounded.

 

[bobdole369]

Either way, never had a problem and likely never will.

Of course, the OP's location could be more suseptible than ours. We've got 160-foot towers with no grounding and never had an issue.

Bottom line is that if lightning strikes your equipment, you're going to be replacing it regardless of whether or not it's grounded.

I always understood "ground your masts/towers" - as basically "give the lightning a nice direct path to ground so it doesn't hit your building, and less chance to arc out to your equipment and inside your dwelling" (of course you sacrifice your mast/tower)

That being said I've heard both sides. Coming from a ham radio perspective - the grounding of towers and masts is critical to proper antenna operation.

 

[imagoon]

Either way, never had a problem and likely never will.

Of course, the OP's location could be more suseptible than ours. We've got 160-foot towers with no grounding and never had an issue.

Bottom line is that if lightning strikes your equipment, you're going to be replacing it regardless of whether or not it's grounded.

Bob summed up my answer. You do it so you don't burn down the buildings near the masts when it arcs to the grounded buildings / power systems etc.

 

[GroundedSailor]

Thanks for the responses.

Here's a picture taken from the corner of the office looking up the creek. You can see the corner of the shop

Here's a closer view of the shop as seen from the office:

I don't have my camera today so these are taken using my cell phone.

Regarding interference, I spoke to the people at Radio Lab about their NLOS 900 Mhz bridge unit and they said the trees don't matter and will not affect the signal.

I have not called Ubiquiti yet. Will do later in the day today.

I was thinking of putting up the office unit on the pole you see in the first picture, and installing a similar pole where the shop is. The office pole itself is well grounded - the previous owners used it for the dish antenna.

By going low I'm hoping to avoid the bulk of the tree that is in the neighbors yard. Yes the tree will fill out in summer, but I can't go further out on the creek as we sometimes have our barges tied up to the shop.

The distance between the 2 poles will be around 800 feet.

.

 

[bobdole369]

900mhz is absolutely true. You'll hate the 1mbit max though. In reality, more like 200-400k (at least that was the case in 1998 when I deployed 35 rollable laptop rounds carts in a hospital.)

The water is going to be very "odd" at 2.4ghz, but at 900mhz you'll be rock freakin solid.

That pole is a good spot. It's in the "ground" but that doesn't mean it's grounded. Just because they used it for a satellite dish doesn't mean that you shouldn't look for rods. Just saying. Often poles are concreted in, which isn't the same as grounding. Several 8 feet copper rods in a pattern, bring at least 4 ga and preferably buried copper strip or braid to the base of the pole and "bond" it (that is drill a hole and fuse your connector to the pole).

That CAT5 or whatever that runs into your dwelling becomes a path that should be lightning-arrestor protected (gas discharge tube is best). And if the pole is grounded with rods, than you can just run a fat wire to the pole.

 

[drebo]

900mhz should get you a good 50mbit connection on Ubiquiti equipment with a 20mhz channel width, point-to-point.

http://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/nanostationm/nsm_ds_web.pdf

 

[bobdole369]

900mhz should get you a good 50mbit connection on Ubiquiti equipment with a 20mhz channel width, point-to-point.

http://dl.ubnt.com/datasheets/nanostationm/nsm_ds_web.pdf

Damn that band got good since 1998.

http://forum.ubnt.com/archive/index.php/t-25259.html

 

[drebo]

You just have to worry about congestion...there's a very limited amount of spectrum.

And, like I said, a lot of cities are using 900mhz for their smart water meters, and those things are stupidly high power and cause shit-tons of congestion.

 

[Dug]

Is a T1 connection out of the question? More money but at least you have proven technology and don't have to build anything. You'll have support if it goes down. It will be plenty fast for what you need. You can always have dual T1 if absolutely needed. We have 20 people in a warehouse with Internet access and IP phones and the T1's do just fine.

Or provide Internet connections at each location and run a vpn so they connect to your network at the office.

 

[alkemyst]

whats your monthly T1 cost?

 

[Jimmah]

I'm suprised no one has mentioned optical wireless yet.

http://ronja.twibright.com/

The kicker with these is the time involved creating it, and the 10mbps max connection. No problems with RF interference obviously.

 

[Dug]

whats your monthly T1 cost?

$250 a month.
You might check with providers (phone and cable) in your area about virtual private lan.
That would probably be cheaper than a T1.

You really don't want to spend your time on connection issues, which I think you will have with any other solution.