Wireless Woes =/

Question

Get a cup of coffee because I anticipate this to be a long post...

First, I'll start out with the equipment:
1. SBC DSL, Speedstream modem
2. D-Link DI-614+ (Rev. A) Wireless Router
3. D-Link DWL-800AP+ Access Point/Repeater
4. D-Link DWL-810 Wireless Bridge
5. Dell Truemobile 1300 WLAN

My problem is this... my wireless connection (or maybe just internet transfer) is very very slow. The average speed of my DSL is about 1300 kbps from a wired connection. If my truemobile card were to connect directly with the wireless router and have atleast a good signal quality, I'd receive the full 1300 kbps. It drops lower once the signal quality gets worse, which is normal. Since the place where I use the laptop most is in that low range, giving me slow connection speeds, I bought myself the wireless repeater. The repeater does extend my range, now giving me excellent signal quality in the area where I got low before. Although the repeater extends range, it significantly reduced the connection speed (although my signal quality allowed for 11 mpbs). My download speed average went from about an average of 160 KB/sec to an average of 40 KB/sec. I called dlink up and they set up an RMA... which really didn't do anything, the problem persisted. I thought I remembered seeing the repeater give about 1300 kbps when I first got it, but after it went down to about 300 kbps, I wasn't so sure. Anyway, my first question is this... if anybody uses this brand repeater, or any other brand repeater (maybe buffalo or linksys?), do you have the same problem? The woes continue...

I added a bridge to the mix so that I could use my PS2 online. With the bridge directly connected to the PS2, it worked fine... I didn't really test the connection speed that the bridge was giving to the PS2, but I found it adequate. Now that my brother is home for the holidays, he hooked up his computer to the bridge, and the wireless connection went down even slower. The average went down to 200 kpbs. Angered, I moved around the bridge and repeater a few times, and for about a few minutes right after I moved them, they would give full strength, a full 1300 kbps... but after that, it would go back down to 200 kbps. The thing I've noticed is that with all of the wireless in use, the bridge or repeater seems to be jacking all of the bandwith. The computer connect through wire to the router also get the reduced speeds. My brother's computer isn't really doing anything intensive (kazaa and other sharing were closed when I did speed test), but the wireless bridge that was connected to my brother's computer was showing lots of data activity. Does anybody know what the problem could be? I've called tech support on this issue, and they told me that the bridge/repeaters weren't designed to choose signals, or something like that... a totally legit response, but I wanted to know if there was somebody else who had this similar problem (I doubt it..), or knows what the issue could be. If you need any clarity (which I anticipate you will need), please feel free to ask.

Thanks in advance..

Levon5100 · Answer

for gods sake...

first of all ofcourse DSL is slower than cable conncetion, second you might be a little far from the server that you get ur connection from, third, why dont you just hook up a good 'ol linksys wireless router to ur modem and thats it...

all these bridges and stuff makes ur connection slllllllloooooowwwww.

plus, make sure u enable WEP or else youlll find the whole neighborhood has high-speed for free...

chill2k66 · Answer

I'm not saying that cable is faster than DSL... the 1300 kbps I get is more than adequate for the stuff that I do.  And I was wondering whether it was in fact the bridges and repeaters that slow down my connection.

dtemp132 · Answer

Well... the guy is right that the whole neighborhood will have broadband for free without WEP or stronger encryption. But, obviously, you've got an issue. Try hooking up a computer directly to your lan via WIRES to make sure this isnt an issue with ur ISP or your wired network (connect it right to the router). After that... try doing a "ping". That means, bring your laptop to a location far away in the house, a location that will cause the signal to be directed across all of your repeaters, and "ping" the router. Go into the MS-DOS prompt (called the Command Prompt in XP under Acessories in the start menu), and type in "ping 192.168.1.1", which is probably the IP of your router. If the "time" numbers are over 30 or 50 ms, then you have problems simply due to the sheer number of hops your wireless traffic has to take.

I would advise running some wires. This doesn't mean give up wireless ethernet.... this means making all of your access points having a hard-wired connection to the router, no repeaters or anything. All wireless activity should have only one hop that is actually wireless... not two (laptop to repeater to router). A good wireless network is framed upon a good wired one.

Finally... before you run wires or anything, unplug that bridge you use for your PS2 and see if traffic improves marketedly. Sometimes bridges can screw things up, but I doubt it.

dtemp132 · Answer

Those few timeouts might be your problem... they are worse than high pings.  They literally mean that information packets are being lost completely, not just coming in late.  When you do the ping, use this command: 'ping -t 192.168.1.1'  , the -t command will make it keep pinging until you close the window (won't stop at 4).  If you get more than one timeout in every 20-25 pings, that is a problem.  And there isn't any real solution to fix it besides doing just what I said: removing wireless hops.  Have all wireless traffic go from the computer to an access point, and let it travel on wires the rest of the way.  No repeaters.  And if you have any hubs on your wired network, replace them with switches (same purpose, same installation, but they handle data more efficiently, and make your wired network faster to boot).

chill2k66 · Answer

I did the ping tests... and other than a few 29 (and below) and a few timeouts... everything was 4 and under. And my computer wired to the router gives full speed (1300 kbps).

C:\Documents and Settings\Brian>ping 192.168.0.1 -t

Pinging 192.168.0.1 with 32 bytes of data:

Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=40ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=127
Request timed out.
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=6ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=2ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127
Reply from 192.168.0.1: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=127

Ping statistics for 192.168.0.1:
Packets: Sent = 75, Received = 63, Lost = 12 (16% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 2ms, Maximum = 40ms, Average = 5ms

I don't understand why it doens't connect to the repeater/router consistently..

Message Edited by chill2k66 on 12-24-2003 09:58 PM

chill2k66 · Answer

Not to refute what you say... but I just want to ask then your opinion on why repeaters were created.  Are there a lot of websites that say repeaters are bad that I haven't heard of?  It does make sense that the less hops means a more stable connection... but does that mean that the companies don't tell the whole truth about the repeaters they sell?

dtemp132 · Answer

Well they serve their purpose (sorta), they allow wireless range to be extended for those who won't or can't run wire.  Some work better than others.  I think yours works worse than most, though.  And I don't know how I would fix yours either... it is probably some very technical interferrence issue, perhaps ever 10 sec or so (coinciding with the regular pattern of timeouts on your ping listing) your cordless phone base might be sending out a beacon to the receiver... who knows.  The last thing I would try would be to unplug/turn off ANYTHING else that uses electromagnetic waves in your house (microwaves, cordless phones, cell phones, park your cars out on the street, INFRARED remotes are fine.... walk through your house and look for other stuff) and see if that fixes it.  If you had a $5000 spectrum analyzer, you could see if there are any other EMwaves in the area, but that is a little overdone for residential problems.  Good luck!

Networking, Internet, & Bluetooth

Wireless Woes =/

Was this post helpful?