Ethernet + wifi to make one network

Question

I have a brick house that was previously wired with ethernet cables. For wifi, are these any use? I want a single wifi network for the whole house. It seems I can get it with a network of mesh extenders. But these bypass the ethernet, which I would have thought would offer something faster and more reliable.

While Wifi in the whole house is practical, I would always stick to ethernet for things that don't move, such as your office computer or the TV. The connection is considerably more stable and typically faster, too. — PMF, Jan 01 '23 at 14:22
Wi-Fi is basically *designed* to be a wireless extension at the end of an Ethernet cable. Using it for the whole network is a newer invention. So you are right at home having an Ethernet cable network and then sprinkling it with access points so phones and laptops can wirelessly get access onto that cable network. That's how it's designed to be used! I don't know which products are the easiest to use though. — user253751, Jan 02 '23 at 18:29

jay613 · Answer 1 · 2023-01-03T19:21:30.667

23

Don't use "extenders". Buy a WiFi mesh system such as Eero. If the cables in your house are at least Cat5, connect the mesh nodes to one another with the cables for even better performance.

If it happens to help, you can use one cable to connect your modem to your main router node, so that you're not forced to place one node next to the modem. Often the modem is in a corner of the building that isn't an ideal node location.

If you have one device that is very sensitive to network performance you can use one of the cables for that. A high end game console or a video editor's file server would be examples.

edited Jan 03 '23 at 19:21

answered Jan 01 '23 at 13:22

jay613

28,850
2
36
112

This is what I did. I have three Netgear Orbi RBK353 mesh nodes setup all via ethernet cable. Gives the best of both worlds, since each mesh node has full ethernet speed, and offers seamless wifi across the entire house. – William Jan 02 '23 at 09:50
7

@William - 'mesh' is just a buzzword to get people to spend more money. It's not 'magic' it's just automated configuration of a set of access points & requires you spend more on an extra base station you wouldn't otherwise strictly need. – Tetsujin Jan 02 '23 at 11:23
2

@Tetsujin you can start a mesh network with one node and add them incrementally. How does it "require" you to buy unnecessary nodes? Your facts are true: it is a buzz word, they do cost money, they are not magic. Your conclusions are incorrect. A good modern mesh network gives better service for less effort ... Not magic but magical from the perspective of the person who's responsible for keeping all the campers happy. – jay613 Jan 02 '23 at 11:56
1

@jay613 you have to have a base node connected by ethernet, no matter how you connect the subsequent nodes. You can get a decent AP for £60, basic mesh starts around £200 & if you fall for the advertising hook, line & sinker, two grand for a full system. Don't believe the hype. – Tetsujin Jan 02 '23 at 12:01
2

You can get a router for £60 and if that provides good whole-home coverage then obviously you don't need a mesh system. If you need at least 2 nodes to cover your home, what good router + separate AP can you get that *together* cost £60, work together easily and can be successfully set up by most non-technical people? What if you need three? You have to make some reasonable assumptions. If OP said "extender" I'm assuming the size and construction of his house is such that a single cheap combination router/AP is inadequate. – jay613 Jan 02 '23 at 14:37
@Tetsujin for context, my situation: 1) I had a bunch of Asus routers that ran Asus mesh in an old house with a lot of brick walls and/or metal lath plaster walls. I kept buying more used Asus routers for CHEAP on ebay, and I had a lot of fun modding the O/S, playing with performance and security features and getting great coverage in every corner. Over about 10 years I spent a total of about $300 on about 8 of them. But they required a fair amount of care and attention, which eventually grew from fun to tiresome ... [1/2] – jay613 Jan 02 '23 at 14:47
[ ... 2/2] What I really wanted was a nice office-like Ubiquiti AP system with a management console and the whole works ... but that would be about $2000. On blind faith I bought a three-pack of Eeros for $190. You have no idea how good these are until you install them. They just to EVERYTHING well. By "everything" I mean all the things that my family, friends, visitors, TVs, IOT devces, etc etc all need to function well. The app is really nice. It a bit like I sold the Delorean knock-off that I built from scratch and bought a Camry. It just runs, perfectly, always, everywhere. – jay613 Jan 02 '23 at 14:51
This should move to chat ... not sure how to volunteer/force that. ?? – jay613 Jan 02 '23 at 14:54
@Tetsujin, You are of course right, but that's a bit of a pedantic statement I think, since "mesh" is a descriptor for exactly that product, one that automatically makes a good mesh compared to multiple conflicting access points that need manual configuration. It's like saying climate control is a buzzword when you could just control your thermostats yourself instead of paying extra for a central controller. – William Jan 02 '23 at 18:48
@William - your call. I built my entire network for about 200 quid [though now includes additional IoT, which it didn't 20 years ago], if you want to spend two grand to make the initial setup a bit easier, that's up to you. Manufacturers are using the buzzword to upsell you… & I see it's working... – Tetsujin Jan 02 '23 at 19:18
@Tetsujin, The system I mentioned is ~250 USD, so comparable price assuming quid is GBP. – William Jan 02 '23 at 21:40
I guess I don't understand where the "two grand" @Tetsujin references comes from. I bought a two unit (base + one satellite) system from TP Link Deco XE75 for $300 for our church - sanctuary+office area - that works just fine. – SteveSh Jan 02 '23 at 22:58
@SteveSh - this is a logical fallacy known as 'argument from incredulity', where you don't believe something can be true so therefore it must not be. Do some research like I did. Sure, you can get entry-level mesh for 300 [like you can get a pair of equivalent APs for just £40]; I was referring back to my earlier 'hook, line & sinker' comment. You can easy spend two grand on a full-blown system if you fall for the advertising. – Tetsujin Jan 03 '23 at 09:59
1

@Tetsujin- No logical fallacy. I have no doubt you could spend $2000 for a mesh system for a typical house, but why would you? And what's there to research? My 2-node $300 mesh system covers over 5,000 sq ft. This is more than enough, IMM to cover OP's house. Show me why it would cost more than that for equivalent coverage? – SteveSh Jan 03 '23 at 12:50
2

You can upgrade and spend lots of money on either a Mesh or AP system. I tried building an AP system with cheap consumer gear. It was a lot of effort with mediocre results. @Tetsujin has been more successful at building a good one on the cheap. That's cool. I have been very successful with three Eeros for $190. They far exceed the wildest expectations I had. Of course you can spend thousands on either a mesh or an AP system. You can succeed either way. IMO with a new consumer-oriented mesh system it's just less work and best unless you need enterprise management features. – jay613 Jan 03 '23 at 14:25

Tetsujin · Answer 2 · 2023-01-01T15:09:53.253

10

You can think of this as being one of three potential ways to set up - Extenders, Access Points or Mesh… so, as simply & non-technically as I can explain it…

The difference between an Extender and an Access Point is Ethernet.
Extenders don't use Ethernet, they use half their own bandwidth to pass data between themselves. Simple, but slow.
OK, so that's extenders right out the window. You have Ethernet. Use it.

So, Access Point vs Mesh…
Mesh can use Ethernet, though some don't. They use another part of the wireless spectrum to share data - this is known as a backhaul. The backhaul does not 'use up' any of the potential data speed of the Mesh network, unlike Extenders. They require one 'base station' that all the other points connect back to. This base station is always Ethernet hard-wired.

Access Points always use Ethernet. Each connects physically back to your existing router over your existing wired network. You don't need a new base station.

Mesh is very simple to set up. Each device will talk back to usually a mobile iOS/Android app that will help you set it up. A few clicks & you're up & running. This is their big selling point; convenience.

Modern Access Points can also usually be accessed & configured via an app, phone or computer. They generally must be configured manually, one at a time. This is slightly more fiddly but not too difficult. [I haven't used very modern ones; perhaps this is now closer to being automatic'.] Once configured, a network of Access Points generally 'wins' in data handling over a Mesh structure.

Once running, Mesh & a network of Access Points are otherwise quite similar in how your network is structured.
So, it comes down to price vs convenience. Your call.

As others have mentioned - you can leave your static devices, TV, desktop computers etc, on wired Ethernet.

edited Jan 01 '23 at 15:09

answered Jan 01 '23 at 15:04

Tetsujin

7,716
1
16
32

3

The backhaul path, unless cabled between the main and satellites nodes, does use the WiFi spectrum. It just reserves one or more WiFi channels for the backhaul traffic. – SteveSh Jan 01 '23 at 17:25
2

@SteveSh - I was really trying to avoid technicalities in this. Cheap mesh shares backhaul channels, expensive mesh doesn't, or algorithmically shares fronthaul & backhaul, for tri-band. Basically, they all 'try to stay out of each other's way' unlike extenders. Using Ethernet for backhaul is going to be an improvement anyway, in a crowded stucture. – Tetsujin Jan 01 '23 at 17:33
I've had issues with (old or low-end) devices getting confused by multiple access points on the same WiFi network. – Armand Jan 01 '23 at 18:12
1

@Armand - *waaay* beyond the remit of this stack ;) – Tetsujin Jan 01 '23 at 18:13
@Tetsujin I tried building an AP network with cheap home gear. It functioned but terribly. The commercial stuff is gorgeous and maybe does perform better than even the best mesh but I doubt it. And commercial APs are very very expensive compared to a good home mesh. The main trade-off IMO is management features that you don't need at home. The mesh systems are all cloud--and-app based. I personally hate that but the ease of use is, well, magical. – jay613 Jan 02 '23 at 12:03
2

@jay613 - I built a full-building wifi setup 2 decades ago for about 100 quid. I've replaced the units since then so now everything is dual-band, ac spec. Cost about the same. Works perfectly. It just needs a bit of forethought & some reading up on how it all works. – Tetsujin Jan 02 '23 at 12:05
I've heard (but not confirmed) that wifi devices like to "lock on" to one access point, even if the signal gets quite weak and a better one is nearby, until the signal gets so weak they can't stay connected and then they'll disconnect and find the better one - and commercial systems pretend that all access points are the same access point, so that they trick your devices into using the best one all the time. – user253751 Jan 02 '23 at 18:32
I also did DIY mesh (because there wasn't cheap commercial mesh like 15 years ago) and while it works great it was definitely a technical process to set up (step one: flash 3rd party firmware onto the router) and even the most trivial maintenance requires technical ability. Vs. there is a lot of competition in the mesh wifi market right now which has driven prices down a lot, Google mesh is $200/3 access points (any of which can be the base) and it's even locally on sale for $120/3 access points, which is hard to beat for something that just works. – user3067860 Jan 03 '23 at 15:31
Sadly, not all "mesh" devices use separate frequencies for backhaul. There are some that are, in effect, extenders. – David Schwartz Jan 04 '23 at 02:18
I think that this answer misses a pretty important point of mesh networks: the client will seamlessly roam between nodes always using the best one. In an AP network, the client will not switch AP until it loses connection to the current one. This leads to sluggish speeds as you move across the house, as you get bad reception from the node you are connected to, but you are not going to switch until you lose connection. – Vladimir Cravero Jan 04 '23 at 13:09

score 6 · Answer 3 · answered Jan 01 '23 at 13:44

The existing Ethernet cables are definitely of use to Wi-Fi, if you add Wi-Fi access points at the end of the cable.

Wi-fi-capable routers can be set to act as non-routing "Wi-Fi access points", which can plug into the Ethernet network and provide Wi-Fi at the end of wherever the Ethernet cables go. Then the different zones of Wi-Fi provide network access within the main Ethernet network.

This router-to-access-point conversion is called "bridging". Consult a router's instruction manual on how to "bridge" the router to an existing Ethernet network.

(Of course there are dedicated Wi-Fi access point devices that you can buy that are already set up to "bridge", but I've heard that they may be more expensive.)

Here is how I have converted Dlink, Linksys, and DDWRT routers to be access points: (Follow the router's instructions on doing this if such are provided.)

Connect the router to a standalone PC or laptop using a single network cable, not connected through the Ethernet network. Set the PC/laptop's Ethernet port to use DHCP-served dynamic IP address, if it was not already.
The PC should get an IP address from the new router, and should be able to access the router's web configuration page.
Find the following settings:

router mode > bridge mode
router DHCP server > off
router IP address > set to static IP address, an unused address within the Ethernet network's IP address range and netmask.

Reboot the router and unplug it from the PC.
Set your PC to a static IP address in the same range and netmask as the IP address you picked for the router's IP address and netmask. (This should now also be the same IP range and netmask as the Ethernet network.)
Plug the router and PC back together again.
You should be able to access the router's web page again, at the router's static IP address.
Set up the Wi-Fi SSID and authentication.
Unplug the router from the PC. Set the PC back to dynamic again if it was so before. Plug the router into the Ethernet network.
Connect a Wi-Fi device to the router's chosen SSID. If everything has gone well, the device should be on the Ethernet network.

There are a few schemes for naming the SSID and setting the 2.4Ghz channel (there's probably enough 5Ghz channels that special setup for 5Ghz may not be necessary):

If your neighbors are far enough away that you have fairly unused 2.4Ghz bandwidth at your house, you could put the main Wi-Fi router at channel 1 and a Wi-Fi access point on channel 11. A third access point can go on channel 6. Careful positioning of the "bubbles" of Wi-Fi can ensure that if you must add a fourth access point your channels won't overlap much. USA-centric channel numbering here. If your country allows up to channel 13, channels 1, 5, 9, 13 can be used, add a 4th access point, then you have complete freedom in avoiding channel interference (credit for four-channel info https://www.extremenetworks.com/extreme-networks-blog/2-4-ghz-channel-planning/)

If you use the same SSID and authentication in the main router and all of the access points, a Wi-Fi device can bounce from point to point seamlessly. You could also label the SSIDs differently, if you have upstairs and downstairs access points almost on top of each other, so the family knows which access point they're connecting to.

I have set up bridged-router access points at my old workplace and in my home successfully. The workmates and kids are happy...

I'm not sure why you think an AP would be more expensive than a router, nor why you would need all that faff to set up an AP. They're pretty much plug & play these days. — Tetsujin, Jan 01 '23 at 14:52
True, if what I've heard is wrong and wi-fi access points aren't more expensive, then a plug-n-play WAP would probably be a lot easier. But Wi-Fi routers may be more likely to be in one's old equipment bin, and the 'faff' is for converting a wi-fi router into an access point. A Wi-Fi router in the hand may be better than two WAPs in the cart. — Triplefault, Jan 01 '23 at 17:36
On the D-Link and Archer wifi routers I've had, it's trivial to use them as access points: just plug an ethernet cable into one of the 4 "internal network" switch ports (not the "upstream" port). (Also disable the DHCP server). Setting multiple of them to use the same SSID lets devices switch between them based on signal strength. In my experience, "router" devices with 4-port ethernet switches + an upstream port were the cheapest way to buy an access point 10 to 15 years ago, in Canada, @Tetsujin. If that's changed, great. — Peter Cordes, Jan 04 '23 at 01:55

score 1 · Answer 4 · answered Jan 02 '23 at 15:23

1

If your house is both huge and sprawling, the Ethernet can be used to build a professional-grade network. At my work, I built such a thing using

A gateway device
A cloud management device
A power-over-Ethernet switch (PoE)
Multiple wired access points

Now, you can avoid some of that equipment. A local computer can act as your management device, but you'd probably want a gateway (AKA "a router"). The access points are also sold with individual PoE injectors, removing the need for a PoE switch.

The catch here is cost: the access points are $100-200 each. The gateway device is another $250. The cloud management device is another $250. That makes this really expensive for a home network, especially when you can buy a full-on mesh system for far less. So why would you even consider it? If you want an esoteric setup (say an external AP or a WiFi bridge to a distant out-building), this affords you that ability easily.

answered Jan 02 '23 at 15:23

Machavity

23,184
6
41
90

This is complete overkill for a domestic setup. – Tetsujin Jan 02 '23 at 16:30
2

My evil twin has done a lot of these for small commercial buildings. When the pandemic came along he did some (and occasionally gets calls for more) in ordinary homes, including from people who tried the cheap stuff and weren't satisfied. Serious work from home can easily justify doing this. – manassehkatz-Moving 2 Codidact Jan 02 '23 at 18:12
If you want overkill, I'm running a Cisco firewall box in my basement controlling access between subnets (personal, guest, home-automation, eventual DMZ) and between them and the public internet. I'm using consumer routers in access-point mode for wifi access to each of the subnets which needs wifi, with the Cisco doing all the DHCP management. Haven't felt any need for mesh yet; routers in office or basement reach the whole house quite adequately and if I need full speed I've got cable drops where I need them. – keshlam Jan 07 '23 at 21:30

score 1 · Answer 5 · answered Jan 02 '23 at 22:44

My house is set up this way:

This is what I have:

[Cable Modem] -> 12 port switch connected to ethernet cables.

Some of the ethernet cables go straight to hardware. Some go to EERO mesh networks. One goes to an EERO that then has a 6 way switch coming off of it.

One or two EEROS operate as extenders.

The advantage of this is that devices that can take advantage of the hardwired ethernet do, and don't take up spectrum in the house. It also allows me to run a guest network, and separately have a firewalled network.

I also have top-notch coverage of the house.

score 0 · Answer 6 · answered Jan 01 '23 at 11:15

It depends on how much want to splurge. The extenders work fine, they are cheap, often free from your ISP, but are limited in setup and slightly slower. If coming from the ISP, then they tend to want to be the DHCP server, thus stopping your existing network. I had a real battle to convert my freebie to not be the DHCP server.

But they work fine and they have a reasonable range. I have used it in my holiday home, but I am using something more upmarket at home. The reliability will be the same.

score 0 · Answer 7 · answered Jan 02 '23 at 23:07

I'm using a mesh network configuration (TP-Link Deco). I have 7 mesh points. All but one is wired. This offers the best of both worlds. I get more stability/reliability for sure. My house has two layers of stucco and one mesh cage for each. The Ethernet makes it possible for me to spread out the mesh points farther covering interior and exterior more effectively.

score 0 · Answer 8 · answered Jan 07 '23 at 15:10

Something to note regarding extenders or mesh networks, is that WiFi is half-duplex, meaning it has to either transmit or receive, whereas ethernet does both simultaneously.

Obviously the user device (tablet, phone) can only transmit or receive since it's on WiFi, but when your extenders or mesh are talking to each other or the base station, they're also on half-duplex links. So the WiFi link between each mesh unit can be a bottleneck. Never mind that only one device can transmit or receive on a WiFi connection at a time, so multiple devices on a single link are already sharing that bandwidth.

With an access point (connected using Ethernet), the only half-duplex part of the network is (generally) the end point at the user. With APs, the only bottleneck is the WiFi link between the AP and the user device. Plus, you can plug static devices (desktop computer, smart TV) into ethernet if they're in rage of a port, and avoid any bandwidth issues.

Since you already have the ethernet installed, I would use that with multiple access points (routers). It's how I have my own home set up (although I had to run the ethernet myself). I have the router where my service comes in, and I have two other routers connected to that one by ethernet. Each router has its own IP (192.168.1.1 for base, .2 and .3 for the APs), and the APs have DNS and DHCP disabled, using the base router for those functions. The WiFi SSID on each router is the same, so user devices can hand off between APs. Hopefully your ethernet is properly labeled, so you know how it's all connected!

APs don't need to be expensive. You don't need to buy brand new—a used WiFi router makes a fine AP. I just bought a used Netgear R7000 Nighthawk off Craigslist for $20.

Ethernet + wifi to make one network

8 Answers8