wireless network > 500m ???

[SandLizard]

Wow, first post. Now to the problem:

I live in a broadband-god-forsaken area of nebraska. I would get a satellite connection, but cannot justify the cost without being able to share it with a neighbor. I am looking for the cheapest way to connect two rural houses, at a distance of about 500-550 meters (that's my closest estimate). I considered wireless, and it seems to be the best, but cannot find a cheap way for the small amount of distance I need covered.

Does anyone know of the best way to bridge the two points? Line of sight is not a problem--I can set up the equipment to easily have line of sight if needed. I also considered a fiber connection, but am totally unsure of the cost of cabling and the connections on each end.

Am I hopelessly dreaming that I can connect the two points (I would like it under $500US), or is it a possibility?

 

[JackMDS]

Here you go: Wireless Networking Reference - Antennas / Range Boosting.

 

[SandLizard]

hrm....thanks jack.

maybe i'll have to make me a bootleg wireless connection....sounds like it will work. now, just must find time.

 

[PCMarine]

This is a guess but...

would putting some ethernet cable + amplifier (If Needed) in some pipe and running it between the houses work? Im sure that It would be faster, more reliable, and possibly cheaper then wireless.

If you want to go wireless, I know they have 5.8 ghz wireless networks coming out soon, so I imagine their range is pretty far

 

[rw120555]

would putting some ethernet cable + amplifier (If Needed) in some pipe and running it between the houses work? Im sure that It would be faster, more reliable, and possibly cheaper then wireless.

Periodically there are threads about this sort of thing, warning about how you take your life into your hands if you do this, at least if you don't do it right. Make sure you know what you are doing before you try anything like this. ScottMac always has some good thoughts about this sort of thing. Review old threads or start a new one on safety issues before you even consider this.

 

[Abzstrak]

If your a tinkerer you can setup to cheap AP's with some pringle can antenna's for well under $200 with about a .5-.75 mile range without too much difficulty. search around on the web, a number of people have also used modified Directv dishes and the like too...

Oh, and NEVER RUN A COPPER WIRE

 

[ktwebb]

Yeah, forget about cabling unless you plan on running fiber.

As to the wireless option. Completely viable. You could get two AP's that will bridge and two yagis, for less than 400 bucks. If you wanted to go the "cantenna" route it would be markedly cheaper than that. Since you want to share an internet connection you are probably better off buying an integrated AP/Router combo for the host side and getting an AP that has a client mode or even a dedicated workgroup bridge like the WET11 on the other end point. At that distance a couple of 5 dBi yagis would be plenty. Since you mentioned satellite, it may be that they would only provide you with USB connectivity. In that circumstand you might have to use ICS or some other Windows based connection sharing software. For that you'd be back to straight bridging with neither AP in AP mode and a wired NIC in the host PC as the LAN backbone card.

 

[SandLizard]

for all the help guys, and in case anyone else is wondering, I found a good site that explains how to build your own higher-gain antenna and where to get parts you can't make:

http://www.turnpoint.net/wireless/cantennahowto.html

well, I found the time to do it, but I seem to have misplaced my energy...anyone seen it?

-sandlizard

 

[SandLizard]

^bad post-should read "thanks for all the help....."

By they way, does anyone know about fiber for a cabling option? I've tried to search for prices on cable and the terminators on the end, but have found nothing. Anyone have experience also about how hard it is to work with?

ktwebb, I pretty much planned on the satellite being USB and having to do ICS w/ a wireless NIC on the receiving end (my neighbors)--will look further into the cantenna, but want to find the good bases/wireless NICs that allow it easily w/o breaking open the respective cases.

-sandlizard
--obey me, for i am a dairyfarmer...er...something

 

[piasabird]

I researched running fiber and what it takes they make a device called a media converter that costs about $120.00 and you would need 2 of them. Then you have to pay for cable. It would take an installer to run the wire, because it takes a long time to buff the wire ends so they can be put into the plugs (1 hour). Then you could run this cable even next to a powerline, because it does not conduct and it does not pick up magnetic or electrical interference.

I have heard of companies in europe that run the fiber and the electrical lines through the same conduit and even use the transformer stations as networking stations.

I don't know what the electrical company would say if you wanted to run the cable on telephone poles?

It of course could be buried; I can imagine how long it would take to rent a trench digger and dig the trench like they do for a water line.

 

[SandLizard]

running cable would not be any problem whatsoever...heh...i'm nebraskan! lot's o' tractors and equipment if needed, a trench wouldn't be a problem, but i'd probably run along the hotwires for the cornfields--wires to keep cattle in our out. it'd probably take a good half mile of cable or so to do it that way, maybe up to 900 meters.

i bet any company that specializes in doing it that way is quite expensive though, especially for travel times to my private boondocks. in the long run, it would probably be better, less prone to interference, but just not plain worth it. my neighbor wouldn't be doing much besides DTN weather and markets and email and simple internet--i was just wondering of cost. seems to me that homemade antenna amplifiers for wireless seems a best bet. too bad i'd have to cut some trees down. break out the chain saw!

-sandlizard
--my tractor vs. your car, i win.

 

[ktwebb]

")--will look further into the cantenna, but want to find the good bases/wireless NICs that allow it easily w/o breaking open the respective cases"

I hadn't even addressed doing it with 802.11b NIC's instead of bridging but you can certainly do that. Just setup the cards in AD HOC mode and get ones with connectors for external antennas. Just about any Lucent based client card (Orinoco, Agere, Avaya, now proxim. Pretty much all the same co.) will have their own proprietary Orinoco connectors that any online vendor that sells antennas will have connectors and/or premade pigtails for. That's one of the problems with making your own "cantenna". Pigtail and connector. I am biased because I installed these things professionally for years, but getting a standard yagi with a premade pigtail and whatever type connector you need from a pro is a better choice in both the long and short run than a "do it yourself" directional antenna.

 

[SandLizard]

i understand biases, i have many myself, but when you say...

...a pro is a better choice in both the long and short run than a "do it yourself" directional antenna...

is better in the long run *and* short run, what do you mean by it? lifetime, warranty, dB, weather resistance? I haven't seen a cost effective one in my searches (nothing under 150) and it seems like I can build my own antennas for about 30-40 depending on quality of materials (including pigtail)...

-sandlizard
--now thouroughly confused, the way it should be...

 

[Soybomb]

If you've got line of sight wireless should be cheap and easy. Look at maybe the linksys WET-11s to bride your networks together. www.fab-corp.com sells some antennas. You might even call them and let them recommend a setup for your situation, they're great guys.

edit: if you haven't seen anything under 150 then definatley look at fabcorp, you should be able to find a panel of a parabolic to suit your needs for well under that.

 

[ktwebb]

"what do you mean by it?"

quality, both short and long term. Granted, this is not a comercial job and if finding ways to cut costs is a goal or heavy concern then why not make your own antennas. My suggestions here and on any board I frequent are based solely on my experience in the industry. Basically doing exactly what this guy is wanting to do on a much grander scheme. Wireless WAN's and mid to very large WLAN's. I just can't see putting any faith in a pringles can. Any can you buy at the grocery store for that matter. To each his own and more power to anyone willing to make their own. The beautiful thing about Cantennas is the ridiculously low cost. There really isn't much risk involved at all. Your out of pocket money anyway. Because of that warranty and longevity isn't really a bargaining point. For me, I want peace of mind that if I start to have link trouble the antenna is the last piece of the puzzle I have to troubleshoot and with a home-ade antenna, it would probably be the first.

 

[SandLizard]

ktwebb: good point, well taken. thanks.

I've been looking at two WET11s and some antennas from www.fab-corp.com. Doesn't seem like it would break the bank at all.

question:
What type of cabling do I require to hook a WET11 to a higher-gain antenna that would be about 20 ft away? Fab-corp sells some cables and such, but do I need a pigtail to connect the coax cable from the antenna to the linksys? or am I just thinking wrong in the head?

-sandlizard
--there are no dumb questions, only inquisitive idiots

 

[ktwebb]

At 20 feet the proper term for it would be transmission cable. Pigtails are generally very short and used to connect say, an antenna to lightening arrestor. Or an Amp to the posts on an AP or bridge. I would also call a piece of coax with connectors on each end that connected an AP to the antenna directly a pigtail if it were short. At 20 feet it moved into Transmission cable territory.

At 20 feet you will want LMR400. Beldin makes a cheaper alternative called 9913 but is a bit more lossy. My preference will always be LMR cable, and for your distance LMR400 is perfect. I believe the WET11 has Reverse Polarity TNC connectors, R-TNC, and the antenna end will vary, obviously based on what type connector the antenna you purchase has. More often than not it would be a Type N connector but you can have TNC connectors on antennas as well. I'll say this, crimping connectors is a huge problem in circumstances when it is not done properly. Extreme loss can come from a poor crimp or outright loss on connectivity. Have your cables pre-made is a pretty good rule of thumb. Any good cable maker will not only know what he/she is doing, but they will also test the cable. If you don't already have the crimp tool it is not cost efficient to do your own anyway if the guy crimping for you is not raping you with outrageous fees. Don't know much about Fabcorp but I would guess they can make a pre-crimped tranny cable for you. If you have the tool but have never crimped coax with TNC or N connectors then I'd suggest getting a couple extra connectors for each end, along with making sure you have some slack in the cable in case you have to re-do it.

 

[JackMDS]

You should look at the Linksys WAP11, and D-Link 900AP+.

They are about the same price, but they more flexible then the WET11.

As for Anttenae hardware, you can find it here.

A selection of aux. Antennae, Cables, and Hardware.

 

[ktwebb]

Concur. Once Linksys allowed their AP's to be turned into workgroup bridges, the concept of a dedicated WGB, the WET11, seems a bit ridiculous. What's the point? You can get the same functionality from a device that is capable being an AP or a point to multipoint bridge. And repeating functions in the case of the D-Link AP's with that firmware. Now if they sold the WET11 for 40 bucks or something then I could see it but they're as expensive or more in many cases than their flagship AP, the WAP11. It's a dead device marketing wise yet they still are selling them as far as I know.

 

[SandLizard]

christ. soooo much I don't know. *bow down to ktwebb and jackmds*

maybe i should stick to programming and milking cows...too bad i can't write code for the latter though.

is it possible to use an wireless AP product for both a wireless AP at each location *and* for connecting the two together at the proposed 500-550m? That would keep my wiring to a minimum, but would not be necessary.

thanks again for all the help.

-sandlizard

 

[ktwebb]

It was a while ago but there was this thread about that started at one of the boards I go to. I believed that no SOHO bridge could broadcast as an AP at the same time. One of the responses was that a recent firmware upgrade had given him that capability and that he was doing it right then. What Mfg I can't remember. It was a budget/SOHO AP though. I want to say D-Link or Netgear but I wouldn't swear to it. Cisco's bridges have always had that capability but I always recommended against it. There 1000 bucks pieces of hardware anyway. It would basically become a repeater without the RJ-45 port disconnected, something wireless repeaters generally do, SOHO and enterprise. I just never did trust it as a solution however you could always try it and see if it worked for you. Unfortunately I can't remember exact hardware, or even which board it was from, and I am a member at many. Even if I could it, the thread would be buried so deep it would be very dificult to find. I guess the bottom line of this diatribe I am writing is, I have heard that there is a budget AP that can Bridge and also allow associations from wireless clients at the same time. I just don't know which one it is or if it's even true. Perhaps an email to the various big players might yield some results. D-Link, Linksys, Netgear, SMC etc...

 

[JackMDS]

At the moment I have in one location, SMC 7004WBR Wireless Router, connected to a DSL service. It provides Wireless Access to the computers on the premise.

At a second location (about 100? away through two walls and dense brush) I have a D-Link 900AP+ (it is the only SOHO AP that can act as a repeater using firmware 2.2) with a good external Omni directional Antenna, configured as a Repeater. The D-Link provides a connection to the SMC, and Wireless coverage for the second premise. (The D-Link being a one radio repeater provides half of the bandwidth to the second location).

Your problem is the distance. Using a Wireless Cable/DSL Router will not work; the D-Link will not receive the Wireless Router.

What you should try is a Regular Router with an AP (configured as an AP) plugged into it and equipped with a good external Antenna. A D-Link 900AP+ with a good external Antenna on the other site. If you have a straight line with no obstructions it might work and provide coverage for both sites.

I would add that I never tried to cover such a distance. Whatever you get make sure that it is returnable.

The Link that I provided above for Antennae will honor 30 days return.

If it works it should cost about $450.

 

[ktwebb]

"Using a Wireless Cable/DSL Router will not work"

Why do you say that? As long as the device had posts that allow for detachable antennas it would. Could anyway. No less chance than a dedicated AP with like power output and controller. In other words, it's still an AP.

 

[Soybomb]

My main reason for suggesting the wet11 is that its cheap, can be hacked for POE and is shown so far to be a pretty reliable box even outdoors.

This is the first link I turned up of someone putting a wet11 in a box with an antenna and a POE hack

There are more elegant hacks for it to with poe to the board. Search the WISP forums and dslreports for more examples.

 

[rw120555]

Originally posted by: ktwebb
Concur. Once Linksys allowed their AP's to be turned into workgroup bridges, the concept of a dedicated WGB, the WET11, seems a bit ridiculous. What's the point? You can get the same functionality from a device that is capable being an AP or a point to multipoint bridge. And repeating functions in the case of the D-Link AP's with that firmware. Now if they sold the WET11 for 40 bucks or something then I could see it but they're as expensive or more in many cases than their flagship AP, the WAP11. It's a dead device marketing wise yet they still are selling them as far as I know.

As I understand it, the Wet11 will work with any brand of wireless equipment. The WAP11 configured as a bridge or client, though, will supposedly only work with other Linksys equipment. At least that is the claim that has been made in previous threads -- I have no firsthand experience with either device. If you are using semi-esoteric features, you may be better off sticking with the same brand throughout -- at least one tech support can't go telling you to call the other tech support if there is a problem.