wireless connection for a linux box

[CU]

I want to connect a linux box wirelessly to my D-624+ router. Would it be cheaper/easier to just get a router that supports DD-WRT and use it as a wireless bridge or find a linux compatible wireless adapter? Also can either method use the 108mbs feature on my Dlink router, and will it make much of a difference?

 

[Kaervak]

In order to use the 108mbps feature you will have to get Atheros based hardware. The good thing about Atheros is they have quite good Linux support. http://www.madwifi.org has the drivers. The bad thing is, their HAL is proprietary (although that will be changing). If you're a hardline no closed source anything person, then the Atheros route isn't going to work.

If this is a desktop, don't get a USB Atheros card. The architecture is completely different and isn't supported by madwifi. Get a PCI card with an external antenna instead. D-Link makes one that uses the same AR5212 chipset that's in my Atheros MiniPCI cards. http://madwifi.org/wiki/Compatibility/D-Link#WDA-2320 http://www.dlink.com/products/?sec=1&pid=471

Installing/compiling the drivers is incredibly easy. Make sure you have the kernel sources installed first, download then extract the drivers and from a root shell type: make && make install && modprobe ath_pci That's it, then you can manage the card with the utility of your choice.

As far as going the dd-wrt route, it's entirely possible but I've never done it before. There are quite a few Atheros based routers supported so it won't be that hard to find one. Might even be cheaper too.

For actually using the 108mbps "Super G" feature all you need to do is turn it on in the router and the client machines will automatically pick up on it. In terms of a speed difference, when I had an Atheros based router I did notice a bit of a boost, but since I have a mixed hardware network I never used it beyond testing. I think when the 108mbps is running non Super G gear can't connect due to channel bonding.

 

[QuixoticOne]

I think the other fellow answered a lot of good points.

I'm trying to improve the way I network my LINUX and non-LINUX systems too and am facing a similar question.

USB Wireless NICS = Vastly overinflated in cost. Horribly flaky and incompatible 95% of the time with a few exceptions that you have to research exhaustively to find, and you better be able to download and install / configure new kernel modules and totally rewrite your boot-time networking scripts if you want it to work.

PCI Wireless NICS = Vastly overinflated in cost. Horribly flaky and incompatible 95% of the time with a few exceptions that you have to research exhaustively to find, and you better be able to download and install / configure new kernel modules and totally rewrite your boot-time networking scripts if you want it to work.

ROUTERS = Somewhat less vastly overinflated in cost, but tend to be substantially more expensive than the client NICs. Routers = often flaky, horrible firmware bugs that will never get fixed by the manufacturer, questionable reliability / compatibility. Still, though, typically a BIT more reliable on average than the usual cr*ptacular USB NIC. However the router gives you LESS reliability in ONE sense -- rebooting the PC with the USB NIC resets (usually) the NIC and makes it work again when it crashes. Rebooting the router is the only thing that makes the exteral router work again, and that's usually hard to do frequently / automatically. However when the junky USB / PCI NIC driver / hardware crashes, maybe it'll crash / lockup your whole PC. At least when the router crashes you just lose net access.

Basically you pay 100% or 70% of the same money for a USB/PCI NIC as you do you a router. The router will be like 10,000X more compatible with your LINUX system with like 1/100th the effort at configuring it versus the CONSTANT updates to things like MadWifi for a USB / PCI NIC ***EVERY TIME YOU UPGRADE YOUR KERNEL VERSION***.

So basically I'd say your CHEAPEST solution = generic USB/PCI NICs. Your BEST / most PLEASANT / most PROBLEM FREE solution = get two decent routers and use them in client mode <--> router mode or WDS bridge mode with each other and just plan to reboot them every few days plus or minus if you have some firmware instability issues or whatever. If you REALLY want the best stability then find ones that are ROCK SOLID by recommendation either with or without 3rd party OpenWrt / DD-Wrt / whatever firmware.
I don't imagine that you'll spend more than $50 extra buying two routers than 1 router + 1 NIC, and you'll probably save yourself HOURS of driver update headaches.

 

[QuixoticOne]

P.S. now you said you had a D624+ router. I have no idea if you can use a decent WDS bridge setup with that or if you can buy another one that'll work in client mode with it or whatever. I also don't know if it'll take good 3rd party firmware like DD-WRT / OpenWRT etc.

The most likely thing you could do is buy 1 more router and do NOT use WDS mode, but find one that works well in CLIENT mode and then it should be 99% compatible with your existing router.. though things like SuperG or whatever may or may not work (probably not unless you bought another Dlink of similar model / features to your existing one .. if they even sell any that will have a client mode).

Otherwise get one that takes new firmware to enable client mode and you can probably use it with your existing router with your existing router unchanged, though probably no SuperG etc.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: CU
I want to connect a linux box wirelessly to my D-624+ router. Would it be cheaper/easier to just get a router that supports DD-WRT and use it as a wireless bridge or find a linux compatible wireless adapter? Also can either method use the 108mbs feature on my Dlink router, and will it make much of a difference?

The easiest but potentially most expensive solution would be to get a device which supports client bridge mode off the shelf. E.g. SMCWEB-N.

DD-WRT on a compatible device would be the most flexible in terms of features and uses, and typically cost less than an off-the-shelf client bridge, but is not something I'd call "easiest" primarily due to the issues with flashing and device+firmware compatibility.

Both of these options are short term pain for long term gain. For stationary applications dealing with unconventional platforms/OSs or multiple devices, I personally think it's worth the cost and effort to get a client bridge set up.

However, as you illustrate with the super-g "108 Mb/s" reference, things are less clear in terms of the wireless technologies. Standard-g is fine, but somewhat dated and the generally the slowest. Super-g is rare, and a technological dead end, but faster than standard-g when it works. Draft-n is forwards looking, and the fastest in theory, but still a work in progress and not yet a standard.

I understand the temptation towards non-standard enhancements such as super-g, but don't think it's worth sinking money into at this point -- I'd rather takes my chances on draft-n, although that has its own set of significant issues. Settling for standard-g is a reasonable option when it comes with a lower cost and the greatest flexibility (DD-WRT); rationalized further with the understanding that wireless is a compromise in any case; that when you need the best performance, you should use wires of some sort (e.g. gigabit), and that as standards and support are not yet finalized, there are better things to look forward to in wireless-n.

 

[mcmilljb]

I haven't played much with linux since college. I would consider one option is just getting one of those wireless gaming adaptors. D-Link DWL-G820 Wireless Gaming Adapter, 802.11g, 108Mbps seems like a good choice because then you could use the "108 Mbps" stuff. Then you only have to worry about making sure the ethernet is working to the adaptor, and the adaptor should take care of itself mostly. It only costs 12 bucks more than the D-Link DWL-G520 Wireless PCI Adapter, 802.11g, 108Mbps which will give you the "108 Mbps" support too, but I don't know about the linux support.

 

[CU]

I already have the Dlink 624+ (main router) so I will not be moving to draft N plus I see no point in going to a not yet finalized standard. Also since I already have a Super G router I don't have a problem buying another Super G product even though it is really a dead end technology wise. I don't mind alittle work like compiling stable drivers or flashing firmwares on routers. I just don't want to be playing with beta or works most of the time stuff. The linux box will be running mythbuntu if it matters. And, just so you know I will not be moving lots of data back and forth across the wireless connection. Money is more of a concern than work. I didn't know DD-WRT supported any Atheros routers and would do Super G. I always see it referenced to the Netgear routers and didn't think they were Atheros based. Can you recommend an Atheros Super G router that works with DD-WRT in Super G mode. Also my wireless network only consist of my router and a Nokia 770. I think Super G will work with non Super G and Super G devices it just works better with only Super G. Please correct me if I am wrong, because if I am then Super G is no longer in the picture.