Cack. I've just blown it then.
Coverage and performance, zero issues. I thought that was it.
There is a mention of Iptv... And then options for the lam ports (bridging), but again, I'm not at home.
Frustrating...
I realize you went the route of acquiring another "router", but I really think there are way better solutions to your problem that can stay within your budget.
Your current devices that you are referring to in your posts (Archer 3200, Nighthawk Router) are routers/switches/access points all rolled into one device. Your problem is not with the device limit of your current "router", but is rather a problem with the functional device limit of your "access point" on the 2.4 ghz band. (Note, "router" and "access point" in your case is actually the same physical device, it is just important to use the different terms to understand the problem and find the appropriate solution). Either one of the "routers" you mention can handle the routing tasks required. Your problem appears to be the wifi "access point" and its ability to manage many devices. This problem can be fixed by switching off the wifi on your current router and adding separate access points throughout your house. These access points should connect back to your router/switch by cable (this is called wired backhaul) as opposed to being connected via wifi (this is usually, called Mesh). These dedicated access points perform well in environments with high device load, that is why this is what you see in: shopping malls, airports, schools.
Although many users on HE have impressive home network setups where the modem, router, switch(s), access point(s) are all separate devices. This does not have to be built all at once and can be done piecemeal. Having these dedicated access points throughout ones home is an order of magnitude better wifi than what consumer grade all-in-one "router" can provide. Below I will provide some options (there are others), that would address your problem. I am starting with the cheapest first:
- Buy any combination of these TP-Link devices:Wall Access Point, Indoor Access Point,Outdoor Access Point
These can be all setup and managed from Omada software (which is a free download). Two of the indoor access points would provide significantly better wi-fi than you currently have. These are dedicated wi-fi access points they do this job well. They are powered by POE, the "Indoor Access Point" comes with a POE injector, I am not sure about the other two. Here is a link to a video about the Omada software and the access points: Omada Overview
This free Omada software will allow you to do all of the following: setup and manage all aspects of your home's wi-fi including: SSID (with the above you could broadcast somewhere around 16 different SSIDs, or just one single SSID if you prefer), authentication (WPA, WPA2, Captive Portal, Facebook Login, etc...) you only need one authentication method across all your access points but can have more if you prefer, Wi-fi band optimization (Omada will scan your homes wifi environment and optimizes the frequency bands used within 2.4ghz and 5ghz wifi across all your access points, having them work together harmoniously).
If your willing to have the free software run continously on a computer that is always on, you can also do seamless roaming. Without seamless roaming, if you move a wifi device around your home and it switches to a different access point (broadcasting the same SSID) there will be around a 0.1 second (100 milliseconds) delay as your device switches to a different access point. With seamless roaming it is seamless (no delay). Omada implements 802.11k, 802.11r, 802.11v which is the standards that allow for some of the functioning listed above.
-
Do the above and add this device: Omada Controller, this is a hardware device that runs the Omada software so you don't need to install it on a computer in your home. Since many users prefer the software to be continuously running; the controller above can be easier than a dedicated computer always running. The controller is also nice if you upgrade your router and switches to the Omada system in the future.
-
Do the above, with the most recent wifi 6 access points, more money but the latest and greatest. Note, I would way rather have dedicated wi-fi 5 access points (similar to the ones listed above), than have an all-in-one wifi 6 "router"
-
Do any of the above in Ubiquiti UniFi as opposed to TP-Link Omada and spend 50% more, but arguably have a better system. This is debatable, but realize either Omada or UniFi is lightyears ahead of the all-in-one system you currently have.
2 Likes
A mesh system can run on wired backahaul or wireless backhaul. All Wireless backhauls are not created equally either. A mesh simply refers to a unified network where all the AP's and router work together. Google Wifi is a good example. I don't see separate SSID names for each of my pucks or wireless bands. I have one. When you use a Wireless Analyzer you see 6 AP's broadcasting the same SSID. The system manages what devices connect to what AP. I also use Wired backhaul for all of the Pucks.
I think the point though is that the OP wants to solve this issue for small amount of money. The most reasonable option for that would be to use a older/cheaper Router that can be setup in AP mode. Then connect devices to that router in AP mode that are going to be near to split the wireless network. Personally, I would suggest a Mesh system then you can always just scale it out, but understand the desire to not start over with the network.
1 Like
To the point of getting a router that supports plenty of devices. Google Nest Wifi Pro states it will support up to 300 network devices across it's 3 networks. lol It may just be worth taking the hit and upgrading to a new mesh system.
Is this some sort of standard?
Or just from the marketing department of one company .
Mesh Network seems to be thrown around with all sorts of different meanings.
"Wired backhaul" is a clearly defined term in networking. "Mesh" not so much, that is why I used the word "Usually". Mesh is defined differently between different manufacturers. TP-Link and Ubiquiti use the term to mean different things and they state this. I am not interested in a debate around the term "Mesh", I know how different manufacturers use the term to mean different things.
I understand the OP's concern on cost. Picking up two TP-Link EAP 225 would typically costs less than an average all-in-one router/modem/switch. He would get improved wi-fi in his home and since the Omada software is free this would be his only expense and would result in his problem being solved and also would be a step towards one day having a top tier home network, it would be one piece of the pie already completed.
Note, I noticed the OP is in the UK, so I provided links to the UK amazon site. I wouldn't be surprised if he can find a EAP-225 for under 50 pounds.
1 Like
Nope, there is no standard for the term "Mesh", nor has there been any consensus among companies in its use. This is in stark contrast to the term "Wired backhaul" which is clearly understood and agreed upon.
As was pointed out in an earlier thread, the company with the most accurate implementation of the "Mesh Protocol" is this one: Mesh
Mesh has been around allot longer then consumer wifi equipment so trying to link the definition to consumer network gear is a bad idea.
Simply put Mesh refers to many devices working together to provide a reliable consistent network environment that has few if any single points of failure. It has nothing to do with how they connect to each other but is more about the purpose of how they work together to accomplish their task.
The key is working together. Two ap's that are on the same network but don't communicate with each other are just simply two entry ways to the same network.
1 Like
Away from home and battery dying.
Reply / Read properly later! Cheers!
Ok well you followed their directions to the letter it sounds like. I don't see how that puts the device in an AP mode. All you did was turn off it's DHCP server and connect the switch between the two devices.
Perhaps the device will realize it is attached to another router and turn off those internal functions. Since you followed their directions I would reach out to TP-Link to see why you are not seeing the devices the way you expect. Maybe it is a UI bug or something.
And that should be all that is ever wanted or desired. How the access points "work together" is best managed by a system like Unifi or Omada.
Could you provide the advantage(s) to having access points in "Mesh" setup, similar to what Google defines Mesh to be (since some of your posts refer to a "Google Mesh") vs having several access points do a wired backhaul to a network switch being managed by a UniFi or Omada system.
In terms of home networking systems from worst to best it looks something like this:
ISP modem/router/switch/access point all-in-one (score out of 100 = 10)
ISP modem (bridge mode) plus all-in-one router/switch/access point (25)
Google Nest Wifi Pro or similar (40)
Omada separates (modem, switch(s), access point(s), controller) (85)
UniFi separates (modem, switch(s), access point(s)) (100)
Although, the exact score out of 100 could definitely be debated, there is no doubt this is the order, with Omada and UniFi being significantly ahead of other solutions listed.
My suggestion to the OP was for around $100 british pounds he could solve his problem, and simultaneously have worked towards (ie, purchased equipment) that can go towards a top-tier network setup.
As an aside: TP-Link Omada states that wireless backhaul is preferred, but if not possible you can enable "Omada Mesh" this is how they define Omada Mesh
The only advantage to enabling Omada Mesh, is you don't need to use cables to connect the various access points. You gain zero functionality, and lose some performance, but you save the requirement to run cables to all your access points.
i dont necesarrly agree. mesh access even with wired backhaul all on the same ssid with same frequence causes the nodes to step on each other.. depends how the mesh is set up i guess.
Did you even read my posts? Every Google Wifi device I have uses wired Backhaul. My setup is an example of a Mesh system using Wired Backhaul.
I have one of the Google Wifi Pucks acting as the router which connects to my ISP Provided Fiber Gateway. The other two connect via ethernet back to switch which talks to the main Puck.
The benefits are as follows
- I have one name for my wireless network that works through my entire house on all 3 pucks.
- Because I have one wireless network I have one password to manage.
- If one of the sattelite pucks goes offline my whole network stays up and clients just switch to the nearest puck
- The devices get dynamically allocated between the Google Wifi Pucks.
- All management is centralized and the devices adjust themselves to the environment
- If i need to I can hook a wired only device directly to a puck or switch connected to a puck and use wireless backhaul from the Puck if needed.( i have dones this as well
Google wifi doesn't use the same channel for each of it's pucks and it suppose to adjust power to prevent stepping on each other. There is also a 802.xx spec(I don't know which) is related to how mesh network devices perform mesh tasks. If the Nodes in a mesh are truely mesh aware it shouldn't be a issue, but it is certainly a problem to put the same SSID on devices in the same network that are not mesh aware.
1 Like
802.11s. But many of the things we casually refer to as "meshed" are not "meshed" in the sense the standard defines.
1 Like
doesnt matter here.. there is not enough channel room with all the neighbors so it probably wouldnt work cell. since i dont have room for have nodes on varioius channels.. that is why i use dfs channel for the downstairs router. i tried earlier mesh systems and did not have good results. dont really want ot outlay more cash now.
Yes, of course I have read your posts and you are clearly partial to Google since that is what you have. As you can see from my posts, TP-Link defines Mesh to be something different than Google, TP-Link Definition of Mesh From the link, the TP-Link definition is as follows: "Mesh is used to establish a wireless network or expand a wired network through a wireless connection on the 5GHz radio band"
I am not saying TP-Link is correct and Google is wrong. I am just pointing out that Mesh means different things to different companies.
Omada or UniFi both easily do all the things you listed plus a whole lot more. Your Google system is consumer grade networking equipment, while UniFi or Omada is prosumer/commercial grade.
Not a single one of the features you listed are exclusive to "Mesh". If you want those features while exclusively using Google products you might need to buy the products Google markets as "Mesh". But by no means do these networking features require "Mesh", if you are willing to go outside of Google.
This has got to be, the most incorrect information on this forum, I have ever seen.
Wow! I must be doing something terribly wrong!
I have an Airport Time Capsule and 5 Airport Express. All Expresses are wired backhaul to the Time Capsule that is providing DHCP and is connected to internet modem. All Expresses use the same SSID. Three of them are in out buildings, 2 are in the home as is the TC. Roaming works fine. No wireless issues. Why is the above quote true?
I think "You are clearly partial" is a bit heavy handed. It is what I have personal experience with so I can speak to how it works. I have also looked into Velop, and Orbi in the past. I have no delusions that Google Wifi isn't the best choice.
I also agree Mesh is a word thrown around allot in a marketing perspective and it just confuses people. This is why we need to educate ourselves as to what all this stuff really means. From the definition you provided for TP-Link it looks like they are saying wireless AP bridging is providing a Mesh network.
Yea.. that wording was a little bit strong. The problem is that allot of devices will be sticky to access points and the work load can be unbalanced and cause performance issues. It would probably fail over fine though if one AP dropped completely.
2 Likes
Sorry, I may have been a bit "heavy handed". Its obvious we both want to help the OP and are coming at it from different angles. Cheers and have a great weekend. 
1 Like
Cheers guys. I haven't caught up with this fully due to being away on hols but I wanted to post in here in order to hopefully have some direction for when I return.
I initially purchased the extra c3200 due to reading the link above, saying it supported Ap mode.
As advised by someone above, the manual doesn't seem to mention this at all.
Ill have to have another go when I'm home.
I'm sure the advice for verious access point hardware is brilliant. However for my use, it seemed that so long as the additional 3200 supported Ap, job done (for my use).
Should this fail, looks like Ill need to check this thread for more suggestions.
