Superhub : 5Ghz from Superhub 2.4GHz from other Router?

[chienmort]

Like many on here I have experimented with the SH and have had great results at 5GHz.

Only two of my devices can run 5GHz (laptops) all others run at 2.4GHz only.

Can you run a second router/access point from the SH running at 2.4GHz?

[qasdfdsaq]

Yes

[AndyCalling]

Yes, I do it and it works great. If you don't have an old router hanging around (even an ADSL one will do) then I recommend getting a cheap Netgear WNR1000v3. Reasons:

1) You will have PCs on 5Ghz getting 300meg. 2.4Ghz items will largely be battery powered, old G units or slower kit like printers or internet radios. Battery powered kit will not likely be able to use over 72/150 meg on an N router, so a powerful one is wasted (faster speeds suck battery). You should, of course, run it in 72meg mode most of the time because 150meg mode takes up loads of the available spectrum and is not fair on your neighbours. Many battery devices (and all G devices) will max out at 72meg anyway, including many netbooks, though some laptops can do 150meg. Just switch the router to 150meg mode when you need it to transfer a big file or something and then turn it back to 72meg again when you're done.

2) It has the same user interface as the Shub, being Netgear. You're right at home straight away and the user interface appears seamless across your dual router setup.

3) It has a handy Wireless On/Off button as well as a WPS button.

4) It has a guest network feature.

5) You can pick it up cheap on the highstreet, or even cheaper on the net.

What more do you need? This is basically an N version of the old G router WGR614v9 that VM used to give away. That was a great little cheap router that just worked and never needed rebooting (almost). Well, once you'd replaced the flakey VM firmware with the latest Netgear firmware. The WNR1000v3 is the same. Since you're only looking for a radio here, don't go spending out on a swanky all-feature router when the radio on this cheap diamond is great. You won't be using the routing features so why pay for them?

Give the WNR1000v3 a fixed IP (my network runs on 192.168.0.x so I set my access point to 192.168.0.254 and turn off its DHCP and all firewall features and UPnP etc. then I reduce the DCHP IP range in the Shub settings to 2 - 253. You may be using the range 192.168.1.x so modify accordingly). This will allow you to access the slave router's settings when it's in place. Plug one of the slave router's LAN ports into one of the Shub LAN ports (do not use the WAN port on the slave router) and set up your slave wifi and encryption.

It's that simple. ~

[qasdfdsaq]

There is no such thing as 75 meg mode, but there is 65 meg and 72.2 meg mode. Also, faster speeds don't suck battery, they use less battery. Firstly, because faster speeds necessitate lower transmit power, and secondly because you transmit for a lower period of time because whatever you're transmitting gets finished faster. Transmitting for shorter time and at lower power = less battery suckage.

Contrary to my previous beliefs (that Intel, who make most laptop wireless kit, didn't make any non-dual band wifi cards) even premium laptops are now coming with 2.4Ghz-only wifi chips in them, rather disappointingly. I'm yet to come across a single laptop limited to 150 meg though, all do 144/300. Apple, notably, cap at 144 in the 2.4Ghz band. However, combined with that router, Apple Macbooks and similar will only be able to manage 65Mbps because it's a half-speed router.

In fact, I strongly recommend against any half speed routers. Without HT mode (bad idea at 2.4Ghz) all devices, including fast/powerful laptops will be limited to 65/72Mbps which really isn't much. And if you ever come across a decent device with 2.4Ghz only wireless you're still stuck at 65mbps instead of 144.

Getting a full-speed, 144/300 router doesn't cost any more money, and as you're saving nothing from going with a half-speed one, there is no point at all.

[AndyCalling]

Whoops, long day, I've changed all to 72meg.

Interesting, I didn't think of that battery logic. How dim of me. I don't use modern high spec laptops, that's the problem. Older or cheaper ones are generally 150meg it seems, at least the ones I've bumped into. I'm no laptop expert though and don't have one.

Many netbooks and phones are limited to a single spatial stream though. I have nothing that works on battery that can use two spatial streams.

Largely, I would still recommend my setup unless you have a device that can use two spatial streams (144/300) that you are not running on 5Ghz. If all you have is G devices and 72/150 devices like me why bother. Laptop does more? Stick a dongle in it and go 5Ghz for a full cream 300meg link why not?

Greenfield mode (HT mode) is usually a risky idea. It cuts out all G devices (which most people will still need I suggest) and swamps neighbours' wifi connections. Generally greenfield mode should not be advised to people who don't fully understand the effect they might have on others.

[qasdfdsaq]

I'll agree most (well, all I've come across too) phones and tablets are limited to one spatial stream, I have limited experience with netbooks but can accept the same.

I don't think anyone wants a dongle sticking out of their laptop most of the time though, nor a piece of backwards equipment that's not future proof in case two-stream tablets or phones do eventually come out. As I say, two stream routers cost negligibly more (or even less), and if/when you get a 2.4Ghz-only two-stream device you're twice as fast, and even if you never do, you'll still get better reception and range thanks to diversity and beamforming. You can't lose either way - especially when two-stream AP/routers can be had for less than £10.

Like I say, there's increasing numbers of full-blown laptops with just 2.4Ghz only wireless, but two spatial streams. Things like the HP dm4 here - someone buys a shiny machine like that, I doubt they'll want a USB wifi dongle sticking out the side.

[GavChap]

It's weird how some top range laptops are only doing 2.4GHz, must be a consumer thing, as my 2 year old HP 6730b does 2.4 and 5GHz up to 300Mbit, but that's a 'business' laptop.

[Wallace]

It's not just laptops. My iPhone 4S only works on the 2.4GHz band too! You would think that a 'premium' smartphone would be 5GHz in this day and age. After all, I use an Apple Extreme Base Station and that is concurrent 2.4 & 5GHZ.
My '****** works laptop' works at 2.4 & 5GHz and connects at 300M !

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by GavChap

It's weird how some top range laptops are only doing 2.4GHz, must be a consumer thing, as my 2 year old HP 6730b does 2.4 and 5GHz up to 300Mbit, but that's a 'business' laptop.

Yes, I agree it's weird. My first ever laptop from 8 years ago did dual-band, but with the trend towards cheap these days a lot of newer ones are missing it out. Someone asked recently and I did a search - out of about ~100 models, only 3 or 4 under £500 had dual-band wireless.

Like I said, up to recently all Intel Centrino laptops were guaranteed to have dual-band wireless since Intel didn't make any wireless chips that weren't dual-band. But recently they introduced the single-band 1xxx range which a lot of manufacturers are using; Realtek also make a lot of single-band chips and are getting quite popular.

Hell - even the £500 HP "ProBook" here has only 2.4Ghz wireless: as does the £500 Samsung 300e5a (even though my 5 year old Samsung had dual-band 2x1). This £574 quad-core machine is also stuck with 2.4Ghz only as is this £491 Asus, this £478 Sony Vaio and this £477 Satellite Pro. In fact, even this £1732 quad-core i7 as well, along with Asus' top model - the £2015 Lamborghini

There really is a disgusting amount of skimping going on nowadays, given 3-5 years ago finding a 2.4Ghz only laptop was an effort in itself.