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

[Kevin]

Eric Gerlach wrote:
> 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
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org mailing list
> kwlug-disc_kwlug.org at kwlug.org
> http://astoria.ccjclearline.com/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
>
>   
I normally use channel 11 as there are fewer people who use it and I 
normally get a good strong signal with minimal interfierance.