[kwlug-disc] Wireless separation? (Was: Re: Wireless for January)

Eric Gerlach eric+kwlug at gerlach.ca
Wed Dec 23 23:05:28 EST 2009


I happen to know Cedric is out of town until New Years, but I can fill in a
couple gaps.

On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 08:41:28PM -0500, unsolicited wrote:
> Cedric:
> 
> I remember you spoke to this / presented on it at one point.
> 
> Do you have any suggestions / guidelines for best separating
> multiple wireless networks?
> 
> Seems to me, IIRC, that channels 2, 7, and 11, are the strongest, or
> something. Is there one channel that tends to be less used than
> others that we should use?

It's channels 1, 6, and 11, but yeah.  The reason the channels in the middle
aren't useful is that 1, 6, and 11 are the only distinct set of frequencies.
The others overlap two of those.

A quick Googling finds this image to explain:
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_pzC_7PLtN-0/RjZEpJA_L7I/AAAAAAAAAR8/y_iJfjgqYfs/s320/WiFi+Channels+1.gif

> If the host premise also has wireless, is there one better way than
> another to maximize throughput, minimize interference?

Use some sniffer to find out what channels are in use, then find the least
overlapping one.  I think that's all you can do, but maybe there's something
else that Cedric knows that I don't.

Cheers,

Eric

> unsolicited wrote, On 12/23/2009 8:35 PM:
> >I have been thinking the same - i.e. by having wireless that goes
> >up/down with the meetings, we can have a constant for kwlug
> >meetings, and host sites need only give their access parameters to
> >the kwlug wireless meister (of the night?).
> >
> >The hard links could also be used by any that need same. e.g.
> >Raul's laptop in December transmitting the open meeting, and
> >perhaps his test victims. I gather the wireless itself was
> >overwhelmed at the time.
> >(If additional distance / cable length, or switches, are needed,
> >they can be added as required.)
> >
> >Pick a suitably obscure subnet, publish the details (web page?),
> >except for the password, etc. I think a kwlug well known / obvious
> >password is appropriate, and whatever scheme has the least
> >overhead.
> >
> >At a meeting, put the password up on a whiteboard or something.
> >
> >This would also allow hosts that have concerns to implement
> >firewall rules by subnet. Or they go on 'our' router? As / If
> >premise hosts have concerns.
> >
> >Granted: Hard links may well be outside these rules / come
> >directly off the premise hosts' net.
> >
> >Paul Nijjar wrote, On 12/23/2009 5:21 PM:
> >>I have an old wireless router (Linksys BEFW11S4) that I am thinking of
> >>connection at 97 Victoria for January's meeting. Should I configure it
> >>to use WPA security (with a weak passphrase) or should I leave it
> >>unsecured?
> >.
> >.
> >.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
> >kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
> >http://astoria.ccjclearline.com/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
> http://astoria.ccjclearline.com/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org



More information about the kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list