Wireless routers

[Karl Peterson]

Re: Wireless routers

Good Golly there is a lot of info here.

One of the various hats I wear is I am a practicing Network Infrastructure Architect/Engineer.

In fact at this moment I am sitting at the control console for a enterprise wifi network capable of carrying 1000+ end user nodes.

The OP's request isn't out of line, although it will be difficult.

I would recommend one of a few AP's

While the cisco products are perfectly fine, they are not a product I would go to for standalone use.

The ubiquity products are reasonable for what they cost, but I am not sold on them yet (I have a few networks running on them at the moment). While they are getting better, they would not yet be what I would classify as mission-critical.

For the OP's needs I would direct him one of two ways.

On the lower end of the spectrum I would recommend a D-link DAP-2590. This is a solid dual band router in a metal casing with wall-wart or POE compatibility.

On the higher end, I would recommend he looks towards a ruckus product. Ideally a 7962 as it will be their highest performing AP and the multi-phased antenna and active beam stearing will make a difference in his environment. The 7363 would also be a reasonable choice, although you loose some of the polarization benefits. These AP's still perform very well without central controllers while still being easy to manage.

In either case, run it in 5G and _do_ hide the SSID. Use WPA2/AES as your connection type.

So long as you have line of sight this should work out alright.

Karl P

 

[Karl Peterson]

Re: Wireless routers

I would put money on later generation ipad wireless performance being weaker than earlier generation stuff. May be that's why you can't get WiFi tools for ipads anymore.

Incorrect, getting better not worse.

WiFi tools were never to be allowed on the platform from the beginning due to them accessing undocumented/disallowed API's.

Karl P

 

[Karl Peterson]

Re: Wireless routers

How Apples manages WiFi is poor compared to how Windows manages the WiFi connection. it's something that bit us on a few early installs, we try to use a Win tablet instead of an iPad if it's the primary point of control for our installed systems now. Was talking to a client with a day job managing IT networks, and he said it's a common weakness as well. I'm not an IT person, so don't know the ins and outs of how/why.

Brian got this right.

There is not an issue with the iPad WiFi stack*. Rather there is a potential that the iPad** will assume it has internet access when connected to a wifi network and try to carry out operations.***

This can be helped in a number of ways.

The most obvious way is to simply disable any app or service that may be trying to use the internet when it becomes available. Disabling location services / notifications / siri / icloud (including find my ipad) / etc and then doing a full shut down / start up before working can do wonders.

The next thing you can do is to help the iPad realize it has no internet connection by making sure it has no gateway or dns information. you can do this with a static IP setup (a pain to manage in day to day use) or if you have a suitable dhcp server, you can instruct it _not_ to hand out the gateway and/or dns information.

Sometimes it is also advantageous to actually have underlying IP/internet connectivity.

Something like a cradlepoint handling wireline NAT/routing functions with a bridge to 3g/4g is becoming much more palatable and useable in these days of widely accessible mobile data. While there certainly are security opportunities , they are by no means unmanageable.

In fact, I imagine it won't be too long now before most show's of any importance have their show networks on a 3g 4g backhaul device, potentially with an auto-connecting VPN back to main-base if for no other reason than remote troubleshooting and maintenance.

Karl P




*Not to say that there never has been, but that is hardly unique to Apple. Every single vendor goes through periods of underperforming drivers and firmware at some point or another.
**More specifically, some of the features and applications that may be active on the iPad
*** This behavior is not Apple-centric, most mobile devices will make the same assumptions.

 

[Josh Millward]

Re: Wireless routers

static IP setup (a pain to manage in day to day use)

I'm not going to buy this, especially with the way that the iPad handles network connections.

I have more than one WiFi network that I connect my iPad to, depending on what I want to do with it. Thus, there is more than one network profile that it uses. In each network profile you can specify how the iPad receives its IP address when connecting to that network.

For example, when the iPad connects to my home network that is connected to the internet, it receives its IP address via DHCP, which also provides the gateway and DNS information. Ergo, my iPad can find its way onto the internet and all works well.

However, later when I want to connect it to a different network that is not connected to the internet (say perhaps my testing and development network at home) I simply select that network on the iPad and it uses the last known settings for that network, including the security information and the IP acquisition information (DHCP, BootP, or Static). Since everything on my test network has a fixed IP address and I set up my iPad to have a fixed IP address on that network (even though there IS also a DHCP server on the network) the iPad connects every time with the same static IP address that I have previously told it to use, without a gateway or DNS configured.

In short, understanding how fixed IP addressing can simplify your life, especially in a performance audio system that will likely not be changing much on a day to day basis, can go a long way to making things work reliably in a standardized method.

 

[Karl Peterson]

Re: Wireless routers

I'm not going to buy this, especially with the way that the iPad handles network connections.

I agree with and appreciate your viewpoint.

In my environments, there is no guarantee that the next time you connect to a network of a given name, it will be the same as you last left it. I typically have many different networks in different locations all with the same SSID's to speed central configuration and simply rely on various automated network services to provision the nodes as needed. I find this works best for our workflows. However in this way of doing things, static IP management of mobile devices becomes relativelyhard to deal with*.

Karl P

*By that, it is harder to deal with than if the node was to figure everything out on it's own. While certainly not unmanageable, it still doesn't beat turn-it-on-and-go in the user-friendliness department.

 

[Ade stuart]

Re: Wireless routers

I can only go from what I have seen and that is original ipads having better WiFi range ipad new ipads.

WiFi tools were available until they were removed in March 2010.

 

[Ade stuart]

Re: Wireless routers

On the higher end, I would recommend he looks towards a ruckus product. Ideally a 7962 as it will be their highest performing AP and the multi-phased antenna and active beam stearing will make a difference in his environment. The 7363 would also be a reasonable choice, although you loose some of the polarization benefits. These AP's still perform very well without central controllers while still being easy to manage.



Karl P

I have a 7363. While it may be great in a corporate multiuser network, in a simple 'walking the room' back to back, single user test, I found the the connection to the Ruckus to be no more reliable than a Airport Extreme. I have found the 2.4GHz performance of both of these WAPs to be no more than average. That day, I had best results with a domestic Netgear WNR3500 in the 2.4GHz band, unfortunately the 2.4GHz band is often just too congested to be usable.

 

[Karl Peterson]

Re: Wireless routers

I have a 7363. While it may be great in a corporate multiuser network, in a simple 'walking the room' back to back, single user test, I found the the connection to the Ruckus to be no more reliable than a Airport Extreme. I have found the 2.4GHz performance of both of these WAPs to be no more than average. That day, I had best results with a domestic Netgear WNR3500 in the 2.4GHz band, unfortunately the 2.4GHz band is often just too congested to be usable.

At the end of the day, I believe we can all agree that whatever works is the best solution, and as with all RF scenarios - YMMV.

I have a lot of personal experience deploying WLAN's of different types and was speaking from that. If you have found something that works better for you, that obviously trumps many other things.

Just to go and show how funny this can be sometimes, I personally owned a WNR3500 at home for some time, it had no end of firmware trouble followed by severe rf instability in a congested environment. After awhile I migrated to airports, and then finally ruckus. I don't doubt at all that you had a great experience with the unit, but it nonetheless further highlights the potentialy oddities of RF gear.

At the end of the day I suppose the biggest take-away is to try the stuff yourself and make up your own mind.

As for the wifi thing, it is well documented that the stumbler/scanner apps were accessing a non end-user core API relating to the 802.11 radio. This was always against the rules, but they began to get much pro proactive about enforcing the rules in the beginning of 2010. This was not a targeted at wifi apps in particular, but to a broad range of apps that had incorrectly been allowed into the store at the time.

Regardless of your feelings on Apple's approach to store curation and where the draw the line between system stability and end user freedoms, at least they endevour to enforce their rules across the board.

Karl P

 

[Nick Boulton]

Re: Wireless routers

WiFi tools was removed because it was using a non-Apple approved API to interrogate the wireless card. Apple got shirty and canned it. Which is why if you jailbreak your iPad, you'll find plenty of applications available to do the same things.

 

[Ron Kimball]

Re: Wireless routers

WiFi tools was removed because it was using a non-Apple approved API to interrogate the wireless card. Apple got shirty and canned it. Which is why if you jailbreak your iPad, you'll find plenty of applications available to do the same things.

None work on 5 GHz though .

 

[Scott Helmke]

Re: Wireless routers

Anybody willing to share their configuration for a Bullet HP? I've got one working (after a fair bit of headscratching and internetting), but it would be very useful to see if I'm missing anything. Especially with respect to Yamaha console control. I can get that working, but have had to give up the DHCP server (using "Bridge" mode).

 

[Nick Boulton]

Re: Wireless routers

Someone on Facebook had the wonderful idea of attaching APs to the PA fly frames, that way you'll always have line of sight.

 

[John Halliburton]

Re: Wireless routers

I recently got a Netgear R6300, which works really well. It will still be used around here with the various surfaces, but just yesterday, I bought an Apple Airport Extreme to use with my Apple stuff. Just to see how it works out...

Geri O

I also picked up a Netgear dual band router for my Qu-24, and it seems to also work really well. I've walked out to around 100' without any issues outside. Can't answer to a large venue full of cell phones though.

Best regards,

John

 

[Jeff Hague]

Re: Wireless routers

Scott,

I have had great success with the Cisco Aironet and Apple Airport products. I have had mixed results with everything else.

Here are some more discussions:
http://soundforums.net/junior-varsity/6245-x32-xcontrol-routers-wifi.html
http://soundforums.net/junior-varsity/2510-apple-airport-express-dsp.html
http://soundforums.net/junior-varsity/6902-help-mating-apple-airport-extreme-my-x-32-a.html

Also there's some stuff in the X32 thread, but there be dragons.

+100! Having been the network guy for a college for over 12 years I can say that the real, enterprise class Cisco products and the Apple Airport Extreme products work exceptionally well. The 4th Gen Airport Extreme can be found on eBay for $50 - I have not tried the newer models but expect theyd do just as well. As far as using them for wireless in my live sound rig, one of the things I really like with the Airports is that you can very easily set up a bridge between access points. I have 1 in my FOH rack and 1 in each amp rack with all 3 set as a bridge for a single SSID. It reduces wiring between my Soundcraft Si Performer at FOH and the stage as well as wiring between iTechs in the amp racks. I can go just about anywhere and control the Si with my iPad or go just about anywhere and manage the amps from my laptop.

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: Wireless routers

Actually, if you hide your SSID and those punters have stored connect info for a hidden SSID net their devices will all try to connect to your net automatically as that's the only way they have of finding out if your net's hidden SSID is one they know. You will probably end up with MORE unwanted traffic if you hide your SSID than if you don't.

In a 20K crowd, there are probably more than 10K devices, of which a considerable fraction are going to automatically try to connect to any visible network. A tiny fraction of those devices "might" try to connect to a hidden network. The question is, do you want traffic interference from 9K devices or from 9?

Generally: In a large venue, I'd go for short range set up in defined areas, 2-4 wire-networked access points, and a wired connection a foh. While my experience is mainly with audiences below 500, I see a trend towards heavier congestion all the time, to the point where I'm now reluctant to rely on wifi for showtime control with anything above an audience of around 200 within range of my ap. Thus, for the larger venue, wifi is more of a set-up and soundcheck tool when the venue is relatively empty.

 

[Klaus Zimmermann]

Re: Wireless routers

BLUF:
wireless for setup -> yes
wireless for show control -> NO!
thank you!

Generally: In a large venue, I'd go for short range set up in defined areas, 2-4 wire-networked access points, and a wired connection a foh.

my standard procedure since my first 01v setup...

... to the point where I'm now reluctant to rely on wifi for showtime control with anything above an audience of around 200 within range of my ap. Thus, for the larger venue, wifi is more of a set-up and soundcheck tool when the venue is relatively empty.

same practice here 8)~~

 

[Ron Kimball]

Re: Wireless routers

In a 20K crowd, there are probably more than 10K devices, of which a considerable fraction are going to automatically try to connect to any visible network.

It was explained to me that there would be no traffic - the devices see the SSID broadcast and from that know whether it's encrypted or not. If encrypted they won't try to connect unless their user types in a password.
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/print.php/1492071
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/2865...hiding-your-wireless-ssid-really-more-secure/

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: Wireless routers

It was explained to me that there would be no traffic - the devices see the SSID broadcast and from that know whether it's encrypted or not. If encrypted they won't try to connect unless their user types in a password.
http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/print.php/1492071
http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/2865...hiding-your-wireless-ssid-really-more-secure/

Maybe, but the airwaves will still be congested from all the devices. It's like rush hour, not everyone is going to your house, but you are still stuck in traffic :x~:-x~

 

[Ron Kimball]

Re: Wireless routers

Maybe, but the airwaves will still be congested from all the devices. It's like rush hour, not everyone is going to your house, but you are still stuck in traffic :x~:-x~

5 GHz is mostly unused. Kinda foolish to depend on 2.4 GHz if that's what you're talking about.

 

[Ron Kimball]

Re: Wireless routers

What really frosts my arse is Apple's rejection of apps that allow you to see what channels are in use so you can possibly select an open one. Apple's stance is that such an app is only used for hacking networks so disallowed. There used to be a couple in the app store - you can still load them if you are jailbroken. Otherwise you need to carry a laptop or Android device. Apple sux...