managed wifi

[Hannatz]

Regarding a normal home installation one AP is absolutely sufficient, no comparison to a FritzBox or Airport Express...

[Gaston]

But now...?

Ubiquiti is also still stable?

No problems with stability so far. This accounts for the APs and for the controller software.

I will soon test the VLAN funtionality as I will most probably move my guest network to a separate VLAN.

Note that Unifi allows you to restrict access to your network for guest networks even if the access points are on your LAN.

[Gast]

Thanks so far....

Restrict Access is Not really Necassary because WLAN Network Access is Not really Connected to Internal ....

[Gaston]

Regarding a normal home installation one AP is absolutely sufficient, no comparison to a FritzBox or Airport Express...

It might be true that the Unifi Aps are generating better singla as compared to a Fritzbox, but stating that one Ap is suffisent for a "normal home" installation is a stereotyped statement with no real value since ther eare multiple factors influencing this choice.

Cheers,
Gaston

[Gaston]

Restrict Access is Not really Necassary because WLAN Network Access is Not really Connected to Internal ....

Sure, but may be of interrest for others:

I have tested the VLAN capability. The setup is very easy as one only has to enable VLAN and select the approriate VLAN for each SSID. Most of the work was to reconfiure the 3 involved switches .

While the VLAN setup works fine ther eare currently 2 drawbacks:

1. Management VLAN

There is currently no management VLAN meaning that the accesspoint itself cannot be put into a VLAN and is not accessible from any WLAN network with an associated VLAN.

This restriction has two potential problems:

a) Some low-end managed switches do only allow tagged VLANs or untagged VLAN on a single port, not allowing to unbtag one single VLAN. On such switches using VLANs with the AP is not possible as the switch will only allow to either the clients to access the network via the WLAN or the controler to manage the APs.

b) Security

If one of the WLANs should be mapped to the same VLAN as where athe access-points reside (i.e. the management VLAN) it cannot be associated with a VLAN. In specific situations this may bear a security problem since then clients can map to any VLAN as AFAIK there is no untagging feature on the AP.

2. Configuration check

As each Ap only has one single IP address (in the management network) there is no easy way to check if the VLAN setup is correct. This may easily lead to security holes over time in case of some missconfiguration as there will be no way to monitor the correct mapping.

The only way would be to roam a client from AP to AP checking it is on the correct network.

Cheers,
Gaston

[Hannatz]

Hi Gaston,

i'm still convinced that the statement "sufficient for a normal house" is still valid!
Why:
We have a massive built house with all in all 340qm and everywhere the signal is strong. The functionality is also sufficient, so in the end ist comes all to the point how "normal" is defined.

[henfri]

Hello,

I am absolutely frustrated regarding the wireless reception in my house.
The Fritz Box is located in the center of the house inside an "Installationsschacht", at about 2/3 of the height of the wall.

On the lower floor, I have good reception, whereas on the upperfloor, it's really bad.

Now, I am not sure, whether the place is good.. Because as it is very "close to the ceiling of the lower floor, the rays pass through a lot of concrete, if they take the direct way. Do they take the direct way?

Well, that's not so much the topic, here , I admit.

But I think about writing the device stated here. I wonder, why it is -apparently- so much better then e.g. a Fritz Box 7270??

If I'd buy it, I wonder, whether I should place it at the same position as the Fritz Box now, or whether I should place the Fritzbox on the Ground Floor and the new device on the upper floor.

Here, I have one preferable location, beneath the top of a cupboard, i.e. at about 1m above the ground -and it would be "mounted to the Ceiling".
Is this a viable mounting?

Greetings,
Hendrik

[Gaston]

Hi Henfri,

Hello,

I am absolutely frustrated regarding the wireless reception in my house.
The Fritz Box is located in the center of the house inside an "Installationsschacht", at about 2/3 of the height of the wall.

I guess you are speaking about the Fritzbox being located in the lower floor. There is a common believe that transmitters should be placed at soem height. While this is true in some circumstances it is wron in others.

This and other factors make that there is no "normal" house as I tried to explain above.

In your case for instance the Fritzbox needs to reach the upper floor. Th enearer it is to the ceiling the flatter the angle will be between the Fritzbox and the wifi client, i.e. th emore concrete th esignal will have to travel. In case of armed concrete in addition the obstacle itself comes the steel inside. This plays like an antenna and the influence will depend on th edistance of the steel bars in respect to the wavelength (or multiple of).

But here again it is not the absolute distance that counts as the steel is not necessarliy in the plane of the signal, i.e. the relative distance changes with the signal angle which may result in having bad signal at one point and a good signal only 1 or 2 steps away.

I don't know if th eUnifi signals are sronger as those of the Fritzbox as I did no comparative survey so far. One should be very careful in believing users tests because sometime movin the same equipment only a few centimeters changes the whole reception coverage. So it is very hard to compare two equipemnts in a reliable way in anormal (non-Lab) conditions.

Well, that's not so much the topic, here , I admit.

But I think about writing the device stated here. I wonder, why it is -apparently- so much better then e.g. a Fritz Box 7270??

Well, as said above, the question is if it really is. As said, setting up System B and comparing it to System A which one had before or is even installed in parallel does not yell for any valid results.

Cheers,
Gaston

[Hannatz]

Hendrik, einmal 70€ investieren und Empfangsprobleme gehören der Vergangenheit an!
Es steht ja noch der Gegenbesuch aus, dann kann ich Dir das Ding zeigen...

And for our english speaking friends in a nutshell:
just buy it!

[amaridian]

Wo liegt denn genau der Unterschied zwischen den drei Varianten des Geräts?

• UAP für 65 Euro
• UAP-LR für 80 Euro
• UAP Pro für 215 Euro

Grüße
Christian

[JeZuZ0711]

1. 2,4 GHz
2. 2,4 GHz erweiterte Reichweite
3. 2,4 und 5 GHz Dual Version

[twinturbo]

Und mit welcher Version habt Ihr getestet?

[Gaston]

Wo liegt denn genau der Unterschied zwischen den drei Varianten des Geräts?

• UAP für 65 Euro
• UAP-LR für 80 Euro
• UAP Pro für 215 Euro

Grüße
Christian

Hallo Chrisian,

Der UAP ist das Grundgerät, die LR Variante (für "Long Range") hat eine hähere Leistung und somit 50% mehr Reichweite (laut Ubiquiti). Macht IMHO nur innerhalb von grossen Hallen Sinn, nicht in Häusern speziell wenn das Signal Stahlbeton durchdringen soll.

Die Pro Variante arbeitet Gegenüber den anderen beiden Varianten ausser im 2.4GHz auch im 5GHz Bereich.

PS.: Hatte nicht gehen dass es eine 2. Seite mit der Antwort schon gab

Gruss,
Gaston

[Gaston]

Und mit welcher Version habt Ihr getestet?

Ich hab die aktuelle 2.3.8 unter Linux

[twinturbo]

• UAP für 65 Euro
• UAP-LR für 80 Euro
• UAP Pro für 215 Euro

Ich meinte eher die Hardware Version, aber da hätte ich auch genauer Fragen müssen -