802.11 Networks

[PhasterX]

I'm about to build a wireless network. Is it possible to have the Wireless Router to stand by itself? My Cable connection was installed in a room where the main computer was. Now that that rooms is crowded, I'd like to move the computer upstairs and have internet access via Wireless. Is it possible to have the router downstairs hooked up to the cable and have all my computers elsewhere? And if it can be done, which 802.11 technology should I use: a, b, or g?

[Midknyte]

You can have the router connected directly to the cable modem by itself.

why don't you just run a network cable up there? the speed on cable is way better than wireless.

unless you have a laptop, i would stick with cable.

You'll have a hard time finding "g" hardware right now. it should be out by next year. g is backwards compatible to b. a is on it's own (for now). a and g should be about the same speed.

[bassinvader]

Midknyte is correct - should work ok but with a small network like you have bandwidth wont be a problem with wireless as your collision domain is quite small. See my reply to Ralonso earlier.
Cable is more reliable - Wireless in the home is a bit of a gimmick and cable is way cheaper (not as much fun though) - repairing wireless devices is a pain and can be more expensive both in admin and physical costs - cabling and a hub is easier to troubleshoot and more secure.

Its the new in thing to have wireless neighbourhoods too - if you do decide to go wireless it can be a fun new hobby you can share with your friends.

G will supposedly be more secure but you can bet its gonna be more expensive and a pain to setup as it uses only 1 channel.

a was introduced to overcome some of the bandwidth limitations of b and occupies the inlicensed 5ghz spectrum and uses a different encoding system -I'd go for a if you are securtiy conscious and b if you want to make it easy on yourself as it is the best supported.

[Midknyte]

g will use the same amount of channels as b. there are 11 channels, but because they overlap, you really end up with 3 channels, 1, 6 and 11.

[bassinvader]

Interesting midknyte - I was under the impression that its main criticism 802.11g was that because it used one channel it would make the design of wireless networks with only one access point very tricky. I live in the UK where the standards radio spectrum is different - Does that standard apply now to the UK?
Would be good if it does.

[Midknyte]

Hmm. didn't think about UK vs. US standards. sorry about that. not too sure about UK. From all the reports and shows I've seen, the g standard will be just the same as the b, but it will have higher transfer rates.

[bassinvader]

Yep just checked it - we're stuck with restrictions again.
Why is everything in the US better , bigger and faster than here - I think I should emigrate (Long live the US of A I say) - the IT market in UK is dire - contract rates dropping from £30 and hour to £8 in some areas...

[Midknyte]

Dang, that sucks. I just checked the US specs.

http://www.networkmagazine.com/article/NMG20020701S0017

The system uses the 2.4GHz band, which in the United States has room for three separate non-overlapping 802.11b channels. Some other countries have room for four, but the Wi-Fi standard is based on the FCC's restrictions, so they're also limited to three.