Thanks. I think those articles confirm that, while it's possible, the bridging method described in the article I posted isn't the way to do it. It looked far too simple, and didn't match my (not very extensive) knowledge of what bridging does.
Some more info for Windows case:
https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/46caf797-9293-46ac-b243-da6be979d939/windows-8-client-nic-teaming?forum=w8itpronetworking
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh831648.aspx
http://server720.blogspot.com.es/2012/07/smb-30-multipath-over-nic-team-in.html
---------- Updated at 06:13 AM ----------
TL; DR: teaming and bridging in Windows are different things. You need teaming. Standard support is found only in Windows server. Some network drivers offer such features on their own (Intel and etc.).
TL; DR2 - on Linux it should be much more accessible since it's a standard feature of the kernel
Last edited:
Thanks, I'll probably go the Windows pleb route and buy Dispatch 
I still need to work out other logistics like running in a second phone line first. I'm thinking that if I get two DSL connections, from two different ISP's, they probably won't both break down at the same time and I'll get a speed advantage when they're both working. But it needs totally separate phone lines from the pole, or that would be the weak link.
I still need to work out other logistics like running in a second phone line first. I'm thinking that if I get two DSL connections, from two different ISP's, they probably won't both break down at the same time and I'll get a speed advantage when they're both working. But it needs totally separate phone lines from the pole, or that would be the weak link.
@Dragonbird: Is your area limited to DSL only? That's quite unfortunate. Is DSL service itself expensive too?
I'm not sure. There is a cable service, but from the fact that all of my immediate neighbours use satellite TV, (as do I) I've a suspicion it's crap, and possibly not digital, so no internet service through them. There's also mobile. And there's fiber about 200 yards away, but I'm not sure if they run it here. So I have some investigation to do.
Cable TV is usually not digitial (except the new iterations), but it can easily share signals with Internet data through the coaxial cable on different frequencies, not unlike DSL shares it with classic telephone over the twisted pair. So you can check what they offer, it should be way better than DSL in theory. If you cat get to the fiber optical network - even better, it should be your best option.
Where I live, the two things go together. If they run cable suitable for digital TV channels, they provide internet. The first house where I lived had DSL but only analogue cable. The second had no DSL, and a really terrible analogue cable service (SD only).
The Fiber connection will definitely be the best speed locally, but I'm dubious about their peering arrangements. I suspect it may be 30Mb/s in-country, and 2Mb/s overseas, which is what happens with their DSL connection.
Looks like Intel will be releasing their new series of WiFi chips this year - Snowfield Peak: http://www.kitguru.net/components/cpu/anton-shilov/intel-skylake-pc-platform-detailed-quad-core-cpus-new-graphics-engines-new-chipsets/
May be they'll make 3x3 802.11ac card at last.
May be they'll make 3x3 802.11ac card at last.
Recent update to Intel WiFi firmware (firmware-iwlwifi package on Debian) really made a huge difference. Now I get stable 585 Mbit/s connection on the same Intel AC 7260 card. Before it only reached 500+ Mbps rarely, staying around 300 on average with signal strength ~65%. Intel will probably release 3x3 AC card sometime later this year, so this can be boosted even more with the newer card.
Looks like Intel isn't going to make 3x3 802.11ac WiFi card soon. So I looked at some other options, and Qualcomm Atheros is one candidate that has a Linux driver. But all their cards come as MiniPCIe.
Example: http://www.silexamerica.com/products/connectivity-solutions/embedded-wireless/radio-modules/sx-pceac/
Did anyone try using such kind of adapters with them?
http://www.amazon.com/Mini-PCIe-Express-Adapter-Antenna/dp/B0057UPNBE
It should work in theory.
---------- Updated at 01:26 AM ----------
There is a catch with Qualcomm-Atheros QCA9880 though. It should be version 2. Version 1 hardware has no driver anymore.
Example: http://www.silexamerica.com/products/connectivity-solutions/embedded-wireless/radio-modules/sx-pceac/
Did anyone try using such kind of adapters with them?
http://www.amazon.com/Mini-PCIe-Express-Adapter-Antenna/dp/B0057UPNBE
It should work in theory.
---------- Updated at 01:26 AM ----------
There is a catch with Qualcomm-Atheros QCA9880 though. It should be version 2. Version 1 hardware has no driver anymore.
Last edited:
Can anyone recommend high quality powerline network adapter? I found this one, which some report can provide 300-400 Mbit/s throughput.
Is there anything better?
Is there anything better?
This looks like a promising device: http://www.linksys.com/us/p/P-WRT1900ACS/
https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Linksys_WRT1900ACS
Especially since it has an open driver for WiFi chip (88W886): https://github.com/kaloz/mwlwifi
https://origin-www.marvell.com/wireless/avastar/88W8864/
https://wikidevi.com/wiki/Linksys_WRT1900ACS
Especially since it has an open driver for WiFi chip (88W886): https://github.com/kaloz/mwlwifi
https://origin-www.marvell.com/wireless/avastar/88W8864/
Last edited:
I usually prefer routers where I can install trustworthy open system (OpenWRT or DD-WRT). The later has very user friendly interface where you can manage many options from simple to very advanced.
For that the best options now are Asus RT-AC68U AC1900 and Linksys one I posted above. I have Asus now, but apparently drivers there aren't open, that's why DD-WRT has to pull closed drivers to make their images, and OpenWRT doesn't support them at all. Linksys one on the other hand is using open drivers, and Linksys even said that they plan to continue that for their WRT series of routers, so I'm planning to change my router to that soon.
Plus, both of those routers can provide high quality 802.11ac WiFi (3x3). So you can have practically up to 1.3 gigabit connections (when very close, throughput always drops in WiFi proportionally to the distance).
5 GHz has an issue though with penetration. If you have many walls in between it becomes unusable. You can use powerline adapters in addition to WiFi in such cases (if you can't pull proper Ethernet cable of course, which would be the best option).
Last edited:
Just finished an exercise of cramping one end of the Cat 6 cable that I pulled through the wall (cutting one plug off to do it), doing it for the first time and learning a bunch of stuff about Ethernet wiring in the process. One major tip to those who want to repeat this - if you want to reduce the difficulty, better use solid, not stranded cables. Factory made patch cables (i.e. ones that come with plugs on both ends already) use stranded wires, which means that each out of 8 wires inside the cable is using a bunch of thin copper threads. That makes the cable more flexible, but also complicates crimping a lot, since keeping those wires straight when inserting them in the plug is very difficult. My cable was stranded and I spent a lot of time straightening wires and aligning them to insert in the plug.
Solid cables are ones that use a solid wire in each out of 8, and then usually come in bulk. So you'd need to crimp both ends. But they hold shape much better, and should be easier to crimp. The downside - they are more stiff and not as flexible as stranded cables.
Pull through plugs also help (ones that you can pull the wires all the way through the plug and out before crimping - they have small holes on the front of the plug). It helps crimping a lot. If you don't use such plug it's even harder to align wires and make sure they fit tight.
---------- Updated at 10:53 PM ----------
That's the connector that I used: http://www.platinumtools.com/products/connectors/ez-rj45-connectors/ez-rj45-cat6-connectors-100010c/
And here is their tutorial:
Solid cables are ones that use a solid wire in each out of 8, and then usually come in bulk. So you'd need to crimp both ends. But they hold shape much better, and should be easier to crimp. The downside - they are more stiff and not as flexible as stranded cables.
Pull through plugs also help (ones that you can pull the wires all the way through the plug and out before crimping - they have small holes on the front of the plug). It helps crimping a lot. If you don't use such plug it's even harder to align wires and make sure they fit tight.
---------- Updated at 10:53 PM ----------
That's the connector that I used: http://www.platinumtools.com/products/connectors/ez-rj45-connectors/ez-rj45-cat6-connectors-100010c/
And here is their tutorial:
Last edited:
So now that this thread was revived I'd like to ask a quick question. Back to finally getting a router, I don't want to spend too much right now and I'm deciding between the Asus RT-AC1200G+ and the cheaper RT-AC51U. Both use the same software and both are dual band. The obvious differences are mainly the wireless range and 5 GHz bandwidth. What would be a good reason to pay twice as much for the RT-AC1200G+? Something like stability or reliability or whatever? Thing is most of what I do depends more on Internet bandwidth than WLAN. I'm sort of leaning towads the more expensive model because these things might last a few years and I may end up using the extra features. Question is, is it worth the extra 40 €?
Last edited:
The second has 4 antennas, and the first has 2.
http://blog.dlink.com/antennas-the-more-the-merrier/
So basically, to achieve more bandwidth, communication should use MIMO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMO
Your first router is listing: https://www.asus.com/Networking/RTAC51U/specifications/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.11n-2009#Number_of_antennas
http://blog.dlink.com/antennas-the-more-the-merrier/
So basically, to achieve more bandwidth, communication should use MIMO: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMO
Your first router is listing: https://www.asus.com/Networking/RTAC51U/specifications/
And your second router is listing: https://www.asus.com/Networking/RT-AC1200G-plus/specifications/
That's why it would allow higher bandwidth and it has more antennas.