Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #69672 > unrolled thread

Airport question

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Airport question Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-02-10 18:01 -0700
    Re: Airport question nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-10 20:05 -0500
      Re: Airport question M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-02-10 23:28 -0500
    Re: Airport question Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-02-10 20:21 -0500
      Re: Airport question nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-10 20:28 -0500
        Re: Airport question Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-02-10 21:02 -0500
          Re: Airport question nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-10 21:43 -0500
          Re: Airport question M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-02-10 23:29 -0500
        Re: Airport question Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-11 08:33 -0500
          Re: Airport question nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-11 12:22 -0500
            Re: Airport question Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-12 17:06 -0500
      Re: Airport question Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-02-10 19:55 -0700
        Re: Airport question M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-02-10 23:33 -0500
          Re: Airport question M-M <nospam@ny.more> - 2015-02-11 00:44 -0500
        Re: Airport question dempson@actrix.gen.nz (David Empson) - 2015-02-11 18:55 +1300
        Re: Airport question Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-02-11 10:46 -0500
          Re: Airport question Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-02-11 09:29 -0700
            Re: Airport question Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-02-11 11:32 -0500
              Re: Airport question Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-02-11 13:08 -0700
              Re: Airport question Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-12 16:51 -0500
            Re: Airport question nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-11 12:22 -0500
              Re: Airport question John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-02-11 11:37 -0800
                Re: Airport question nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-02-11 15:03 -0500
                  Re: Airport question John McWilliams <jpmcw@comcast.net> - 2015-02-11 17:29 -0800
            Re: Airport question Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-02-12 01:43 +0000
      Re: Airport question Alan Browne <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> - 2015-02-11 08:31 -0500
    Re: Airport question Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-02-11 12:28 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#69672 — Airport question

The airport utility has an option to give the 5GHz band a different
network name from the 2.4GHz band.  If I do this, would I be creating
two separate networks, so that the 2.4GHz peripherals would be a
different network from the 5GHz peripherals?

I ask because if taht's the case, my iPhone and iPad won't be able to
print to my printer because the iDevices are 5GHz and the printer is
2.4GHz.

-- Michelle

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#69673

In article <100220151801159240%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> The airport utility has an option to give the 5GHz band a different
> network name from the 2.4GHz band.  If I do this, would I be creating
> two separate networks, so that the 2.4GHz peripherals would be a
> different network from the 5GHz peripherals?

different ssid, same network.

> I ask because if taht's the case, my iPhone and iPad won't be able to
> print to my printer because the iDevices are 5GHz and the printer is
> 2.4GHz.

leave the name the same and the devices will pick the appropriate band
automatically. dualband devices can switch between either band
depending on which one is strongest.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69681

In article <100220152005394015%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> leave the name the same and the devices will pick the appropriate band
> automatically. dualband devices can switch between either band
> depending on which one is strongest.

My Dropcams had a hard time when they were both the same name. I
changed the name of the 5ghz and now all is well.

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69674

In article <100220151801159240%michelle@michelle.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> The airport utility has an option to give the 5GHz band a different
> network name from the 2.4GHz band.  If I do this, would I be creating
> two separate networks, so that the 2.4GHz peripherals would be a
> different network from the 5GHz peripherals?
> 
> I ask because if taht's the case, my iPhone and iPad won't be able to
> print to my printer because the iDevices are 5GHz and the printer is
> 2.4GHz.

No, they're all the same LAN as long as they have the same IP prefix.

I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
which network you're connecting to.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69675

In article <barmar-8E4D56.20212010022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> which network you're connecting to.

why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69676

In article <100220152028527603%nospam@nospam.invalid>,
 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <barmar-8E4D56.20212010022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> > show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> > which network you're connecting to.
> 
> why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.

I didn't realize they would do that.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69678

In article <barmar-344149.21025410022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > > I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> > > show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> > > which network you're connecting to.
> > 
> > why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.
> 
> I didn't realize they would do that.

it does, and it's quite useful.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69682

In article <barmar-344149.21025410022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.
> 
> I didn't realize they would do that.

I don't think all devices are able to do this.

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69690

On 2015.02.10 20:28 , nospam wrote:
> In article <barmar-8E4D56.20212010022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
>> I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't
>> show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell
>> which network you're connecting to.
>
> why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.

For people who work in a fixed area that's fine, for people who move 
around the place a lot, 2.4 tends to be more reliable than 5.

Also suggesting that some "assets" use 5 and others use 2.4 spreads the 
load giving better bandwidth resource allocation.

-- 
"Your net worth to the world is usually
  determined by what remains after your
  bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
                                   Benjamin Franklin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69706

In article <Voidnb52c4aIx0bJnZ2dnUU7-LOdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

> >> I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't
> >> show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell
> >> which network you're connecting to.
> >
> > why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.
> 
> For people who work in a fixed area that's fine, for people who move 
> around the place a lot, 2.4 tends to be more reliable than 5.

moving around is *exactly* the scenario where it helps! 

as you move away from a 5 ghz source, it will automatically switch to
2.4 ghz without any interruption in existing network activity and then
as you move closer to another 5 ghz source (or the same one, it doesn't
matter), it will switch back to 5 ghz.

in other words, you get the benefits of 5 ghz when possible, without
having to do anything extra.

> Also suggesting that some "assets" use 5 and others use 2.4 spreads the 
> load giving better bandwidth resource allocation.

that's a separate issue, and not for someone who moves around a lot and
certainly not an issue for a home user.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69745

On 2015.02.11 12:22 , nospam wrote:
> In article <Voidnb52c4aIx0bJnZ2dnUU7-LOdnZ2d@giganews.com>, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>>> I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't
>>>> show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell
>>>> which network you're connecting to.
>>>
>>> why does it matter? let the device pick the stronger signal.
>>
>> For people who work in a fixed area that's fine, for people who move
>> around the place a lot, 2.4 tends to be more reliable than 5.
>
> moving around is *exactly* the scenario where it helps!
>
> as you move away from a 5 ghz source, it will automatically switch to
> 2.4 ghz without any interruption in existing network activity and then
> as you move closer to another 5 ghz source (or the same one, it doesn't
> matter), it will switch back to 5 ghz.

I just leave my iPhone and MBA on the 2.4 GHz SSID at work and don't 
worry about it.  No issues.  Even from the restaurant around the corner 
I can read the news and flip e-mails on that WiFi (iPhone/MBA).

> in other words, you get the benefits of 5 ghz when possible, without
> having to do anything extra.
>
>> Also suggesting that some "assets" use 5 and others use 2.4 spreads the
>> load giving better bandwidth resource allocation.
>
> that's a separate issue, and not for someone who moves around a lot and
> certainly not an issue for a home user.

The situation I was describing was for work.  Where we use a cheap dual 
band router for all things WiFi.

-- 
"Your net worth to the world is usually
  determined by what remains after your
  bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
                                   Benjamin Franklin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69679

In article <barmar-8E4D56.20212010022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> No, they're all the same LAN as long as they have the same IP prefix.

> I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> which network you're connecting to.

That's the reason I wanted to do it.  Here is what confuses me; you can
have more than one network in the same LAN?  Is the wireless
connectivity between my iPhone and printer based on the network or on
the LAN?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69683

In article <100220151955350869%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> you can
> have more than one network in the same LAN?

On one of my LAN's, I (used to) have my regular WIFI network, the 5gHz
network, Comcast's network that they assigned to the router they gave
me (which I don't use), Comcast's "xfinity" network that they want me
to broadcast, and also another network connected at the far end of the
house, all from the same router.

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69684

In article <100220152333465144%nospam@ny.more>, M-M <nospam@ny.more>
wrote:

> In article <100220151955350869%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
> <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> > you can
> > have more than one network in the same LAN?
> 
> On one of my LAN's, I (used to) have my regular WIFI network, the 5gHz
> network, Comcast's network that they assigned to the router they gave
> me (which I don't use), Comcast's "xfinity" network that they want me
> to broadcast, and also another network connected at the far end of the
> house, all from the same router.

I meant all from the same modem

-- 
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69685

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <barmar-8E4D56.20212010022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > No, they're all the same LAN as long as they have the same IP prefix.
> 
> > I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't
> > show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell
> > which network you're connecting to.
> 
> That's the reason I wanted to do it.  Here is what confuses me; you can
> have more than one network in the same LAN?  Is the wireless
> connectivity between my iPhone and printer based on the network or on
> the LAN?

A Local Area Network (LAN) for home users is typically controlled by a
single router which acts as the DHCP server for the network. Everything
on the LAN needs to be using compatible IP addressing, i.e. all devices
have the same network part of the IP address and the the same subnet
mask, e.g. 192.168.1.x with subnet mask 255.255.255.0.

The physical side of the LAN may consist of multiple Ethernet, Wi-Fi and
other segments. The devices connecting two different physical network
segments together need to act as a bridge: forwarding appropriate
packets at the data link layer of the protocol (e.g. Ethernet or Wi-Fi
packets, below the IP layer).

If this is all set up correctly, devices on any of the physical segments
can talk to devices on any of the other physical segments, and the whole
thing can be treated as a single LAN.

For example, here's my home LAN setup.

Cable modem
     |
Airport Extreme (router and DHCP server)
     |
     |---- Wi-Fi 2.4 GHz A
     |
     |---- Wi-Fi 5 GHz A
     |
     |---- Ethernet A ---- various devices
               |
               |---- Powerline Ethernet A
                          :
                       (mains)
                          :
               |---- Powerline Ethernet B
               |
      |---- Ethernet B ---- various devices
      |
Airport Express (bridge) -- audio output
      |
      |---- Wi-Fi 2.4 GHz B

The "A" segments are in a room at one end of the house (lounge), and the
"B" segments are in a room at the other end of the house (office).

Wi-Fi 2.4 GHz A and 5 GHz A have distinct names, because I wanted to
control which network was being used when I was testing devices.

Wi-Fi 2.4 GHz B has the same name as Wi-Fi 2.4 GHz A, so devices on the
2.4 GHz Wi-Fi network can hop between base stations according to signal
strength. The second Wi-Fi network improves coverage at that end of the
house.

Ethernet A and B both include Ethernet switches (B has two) to give me
enough ports in the right places to connect everything. Most devices
support Gigabit Ethernet.

I'm using Powerline Ethernet because I'm renting and didn't want to
drill holes in the house to run a long Ethernet cable. Before getting
those adapaters I was using the Airport Express to "extend" Wi-Fi
network A, but it was a performance bottleneck if I wanted to copy files
between computers on Ethernet A and Ethernet B.

The Powerline Ethernet adapters and Airport Express bridge between the
different physical network types, as does the Airport Extreme internally
between its two Wi-Fi networks and local Ethernet network.

Some wireless access points (or routers) don't support bridging
multicast IP packets between Ethernet and Wi-Fi. Any such device will
break Bonjour between devices on different physical network types. I've
avoided this issue by sticking to Airport base stations, but many other
brands handle this correctly.

-- 
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69697

In article <100220151955350869%michelle@michelle.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <barmar-8E4D56.20212010022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > No, they're all the same LAN as long as they have the same IP prefix.
> 
> > I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> > show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> > which network you're connecting to.
> 
> That's the reason I wanted to do it.  Here is what confuses me; you can
> have more than one network in the same LAN?  

You can have multiple LANs on the same router. For instance, many home 
routers have a "guest network". It's allowed to access the Internet, but 
it doesn't have access to the devices on the primary network.

> Is the wireless
> connectivity between my iPhone and printer based on the network or on
> the LAN?

Think of it this way: different SSIDs can be considered analogous to the 
different ports on a router with multiple Ethernet ports.

Each LAN needs to have distinct SSIDs (so you know whether you're 
joining the primary network or guest network), but you can have multiple 
SSIDs in the same LAN.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69702

In article <barmar-832AAB.10462711022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > > No, they're all the same LAN as long as they have the same IP prefix.
> > 
> > > I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> > > show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> > > which network you're connecting to.
> > 
> > That's the reason I wanted to do it.  Here is what confuses me; you can
> > have more than one network in the same LAN?  
> 
> You can have multiple LANs on the same router. For instance, many home 
> routers have a "guest network". It's allowed to access the Internet, but 
> it doesn't have access to the devices on the primary network.

That much I do know.  But it's not what I was asking.

Let me rephrase my question to its bare essentials:

I'm using an Airport Extreme (802.11 b/g/n/a/ac); if the 2.4GHz network
name is Michelle24 and the 5GHz network is Michelle5, can an iPhone,
connected to Michelle5 print to the printer which is connected to
Michelle24?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69703

In article <110220150929462057%michelle@michelle.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <barmar-832AAB.10462711022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > > > No, they're all the same LAN as long as they have the same IP prefix.
> > > 
> > > > I give my 2.4 and 5 networks different names because most devices don't 
> > > > show the network type. So the different names makes it possible to tell 
> > > > which network you're connecting to.
> > > 
> > > That's the reason I wanted to do it.  Here is what confuses me; you can
> > > have more than one network in the same LAN?  
> > 
> > You can have multiple LANs on the same router. For instance, many home 
> > routers have a "guest network". It's allowed to access the Internet, but 
> > it doesn't have access to the devices on the primary network.
> 
> That much I do know.  But it's not what I was asking.
> 
> Let me rephrase my question to its bare essentials:
> 
> I'm using an Airport Extreme (802.11 b/g/n/a/ac); if the 2.4GHz network
> name is Michelle24 and the 5GHz network is Michelle5, can an iPhone,
> connected to Michelle5 print to the printer which is connected to
> Michelle24?

Yes. To continue the analogy in the part you snipped, Michelle24 is like 
a 100Mbps Ethernet port and Michelle5 is like a 1Gbps Ethernet port, 
both connected to the same router.

-- 
Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69715

In article <barmar-6CC288.11325011022015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > Let me rephrase my question to its bare essentials:
> > 
> > I'm using an Airport Extreme (802.11 b/g/n/a/ac); if the 2.4GHz network
> > name is Michelle24 and the 5GHz network is Michelle5, can an iPhone,
> > connected to Michelle5 print to the printer which is connected to
> > Michelle24?
> 
> Yes. To continue the analogy in the part you snipped, Michelle24 is like 
> a 100Mbps Ethernet port and Michelle5 

Thanks.  That will teach me to boil my question to its bare essence.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#69744

On 2015.02.11 11:32 , Barry Margolin wrote:

> Yes. To continue the analogy in the part you snipped, Michelle24 is like
> a 100Mbps Ethernet port and Michelle5 is like a 1Gbps Ethernet port,
> both connected to the same router.

Best clarification of that issue I've seen.

-- 
"Your net worth to the world is usually
  determined by what remains after your
  bad habits are subtracted from your good ones."
                                   Benjamin Franklin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web