Wi-fi Booster Multiple Connections

[DKRITTER]

I was watching some you tube video's on different Wi-Fi boosters. 

 

One of the video's said by using a Wi-Fi booster you could connect to every point in a RV Park and get very good speed that way. 

 

Didn't seem to make much sense but then again I am no expert. Is this correct or was the guy confused?

[Biker56]

He could connect to RV park WiFi better if he is using a roof mounted antenna Wi-Fi booster.
Speed doesn't increase any I have seen from 1 bar or over 3 bar.

Since I installed a WiFiRanger with roof mounted antenna I get connected to some RV Parks WiFi that I couldn't before or would have drop outs when I did.

[DKRITTER]

The way I understood this particular video is; say a RV Park has 6 antennas placed around the park.

You could connect to all 6 of them and have 6 times more speed and throughput. 

[Darryl&Rita]

It doesn't work this way. 6 times better connectivity, yes. No effect on speed or through-put.

[docj]

26 minutes ago, DKRITTER said:

he way I understood this particular video is; say a RV Park has 6 antennas placed around the park.

You could connect to all 6 of them and have 6 times more speed and throughput. 

Sometimes one access point might result in a higher speed connection than another, depending on load.  In such a case, if you can connect to all of them and analyze the results you might be better off.

Many (most?) parks these days give the same SSID to all the access points.  Despite this, devices such as WiFiRangers allow you to see the different MAC addresses of each AP which enables you to choose the one you wish to connect to.

[eddie1261]

Bottom line though, you are only going to get WAN speed at the rate of the campground's connection. If they have 6 meg DSL, you can't suddenly get 24 meg DSL because you have a booster. Your booster amplifies your LAN signal, but has no effect on the WAN speed. Unless the booster you have has some kind of multiplexing built in, you can only connect to one AP at a time. Maybe they do have MUX built in. I don't know. 

I WOULD like to have a link to the video you saw that claimed to get "six times the speed" to see what he means by 6 times the speed.. First blush makes me think it probably came from someone who doesn't know what he is talking about. Connecting to a 6 meg WAN connection 6 times doesn't give you a 36 meg connection. I would guess that came from someone who doesn't understand the difference between LAN and WAN. Unless there is technology I am not aware of, you can't really connect to more than one MAC address at a time.

[Bill Joyce]

I wonder if the youtuber hooked to a 5GHZ channel that was not as heavily used and that provided the speedup.  Some devices can connect to a 2.4GHZ and 5GHZ at the same time.  But I agree with everyone else, we need to see the actual video to understand the details of the claim.  

[eddie1261]

Even so Bill, the point is that he would only see a "speed" change from the LAN, not the WAN. A 6mb WAN connection is a 6mb WAN connection. I can't imagine these rv parks that are running on a shoestring are providing 100mb down speed to visitors. I just got bumped here at home to 120/12. Man, I am going to miss that when I leave for the road.

I am having flashbacks of customers telling me how "the internet is so much faster" because they added RAM to their PC. Well, the "internet" has so speed. Your connection that delivers it has speed, and your computer with additional RAM may run better with less swap file activity, resulting in graphics handling being faster, but the connection is what the connection is.

Lots of people out there posting youtube videos with absolutely incorrect information. Someone here actually posted Thiojoe's yourtube video about how to quadruple your speed by putting plastic bottles on the antenna masts of your home router. And they believed it!!!

Because if it's on the internet, it MUST be true!!!

[rynosback]

Dkritter, do not believe everything you see on YouTube.  As stated, a WiFi Ranger, signal booster will help capture or boost a weak signal.  But it WILL NOT increase the internet speeds.  The more people on the network the slower the speeds will be.  The only thing that might change is if the only access point let’s say is in the office.  The office is closed so no one is on the network.  If your “Ranger” can capture a decent signal and are the only one on the network.  You should have all of the speed that the network can offer.  Assuming that they do not manage there network and cap speeds and or data consumptions per MAC address.

A WiFi booster is just another tool that you can have to connect to the internet.  I carry a couple different kinds.  I prefer to use my hot spot as it is a secured network and I can manage it.

[DKRITTER]

8 minutes ago, rynosback said:

Dkritter, do not believe everything you see on YouTube.  

I'll drink to that.

[eddie1261]

Also, from reports, a lot of places will shut you down if you are using any kind of repeater, which is essentially what a wifi ranger is.

[Mark and Dale Bruss]

Be interesting to see how you determine there is a repeater in use.  You can check for channels in use but from the base WiFi, there is a device (repeater)  out there.  What is on the other side of the device is not visible.

[DesertMiner]

1 hour ago, eddie1261 said:

Also, from reports, a lot of places will shut you down if you are using any kind of repeater, which is essentially what a wifi ranger is.

Please explain you thoughts on this.....

[bigbillsd]

58 minutes ago, Mark and Dale Bruss said:

Be interesting to see how you determine there is a repeater in use.  You can check for channels in use but from the base WiFi, there is a device (repeater)  out there.  What is on the other side of the device is not visible.

They do it by MAC address.  I just edit the MAC address on my Nanostation to make it appear I am coming from an Old Itouch I had years ago. Or any other innocuous MAC address I chose.   And sometimes they cut that off after a so much bandwidth, I change one of the numbers or letters in the MAC and restart it.  Good for anther time period or amount of bits downloaded.  Its rare anyone is watching it, just an algorithm someone setup looking for certain MAC address prefixes or bandwidth consumed by a particular MAC address.

[eddie1261]

Just that I have had people tell me that they were denied access to the AP because they were using a repeater, logging the repeater into the park's LAN, then logging multiple devices into their repeater, and that was a no-no.

Is a Wifi Ranger not a repeater? I know what a line amplifier is, and what a "booster" is, but not the context in which posts are often made. People toss words around interchangeably sometimes when they are not.

I remember someone telling me  "both devices have to be on the internet" to use a Chromecast. That is not correct. Yes, I have to have them on the same LAN, but to stream from my computer to my TV, what does that have to do with the internet? When that was posted I tested it myself, turning off my WAN but leaving the LAN connected, and everything was fine, as I suspected. Your LAN is NOT "the internet". People think any kind of connection is "the internet". There is also an inTRAnet.

So in the case of youtube, when I see things that don't sound technologically correct, I replicate and test, though I didn't go out and buy a Wifi Ranger just to test. I am not in the hoi polloi that gets stuff sent to them free. Always important to consider the source when gathering info.

[docj]

2 hours ago, eddie1261 said:

Also, from reports, a lot of places will shut you down if you are using any kind of repeater, which is essentially what a wifi ranger is.

This is a widely repeated claim but very few of the people repeating it don't have any idea how complicated it would be to try to implement it.   I have yet to ever see anyone provide actual evidence of this having happened to them.  All the reports are of the kind where "my friend told me that is what the RV park told him."

11 minutes ago, eddie1261 said:

I remember someone telling me  "both devices have to be on the internet" to use a Chromecast. That is not correct. Yes, I have to have them on the same LAN, but to stream from my computer to my TV, what does that have to do with the internet?

Chromecast does NOT involve a transfer of information from your computer or phone to your TV.  That's how Miracasting works and Apple TV can work in that manner, but not Chromecast.  With Chromecast, your computer or phone "tells" your TV where to look on the internet for the video you want to watch.  The Chromecast device on the TV then initiates the connection to the video and streams it.  You may have thought you tested it but I suspect you really hadn't disconnected your WAN.  It simply doesn't work that way.

[eddie1261]

Exactly as bigbillsd said. If one MAC address is eating the whole park's bandwidth because there are 2 TVs, 2 laptops and 2 tablets eating it, any admin worth their weight in pocket protectors can figure it out and knock on a door. 

Their park, their rules, and if they say shut it off, you shut it off or you get out of Dodge. Unless you simply don't care about anybody else in the park like far too many people don't, and in that case, there is no sense trying to talk about it. Unless I can hook into Wifi further away that doesn't eat the whole park;s turkey, I'll just use 1 IP like I am supposed to.

[eddie1261]

Just now, docj said:

With Chromecast, your computer or phone "tells" your TV where to look on the internet for the video you want to watch.  The Chromecast device on the TV then initiates the connection to the video and streams it.

Can you then explain how "on the internet" it finds the movies that are stored on my hard drive? I have watched those movies with my WAN connection turned off to test it in preparation for the road. Of course for web streaming I have to be on the internet, but for local stuff I don't need the WAN.

[bigbillsd]

BTW,  does anyone have a link to the device that will connect to all the parks AP's?   I would like to see how that would work.   

Usually I want to point at the closest AP to the ISP connection.   Lots of parks don't trench and pull cable, they use point to point bridges to get signal to AP's further away from the ISP up-link.   Every hop in a WiFi network slows the speed by 1/2, which can be staggering if there more than one hop.  So connecting to the AP that is closest to the service can double your speed if they use bridges instead of running cable.    As others have said, it won't make the internet any faster if its a slow internet up-link.   

Also,  a few parks have 5 Ghz AP's, and there are usually very few connections on those AP's.  

At a park in Kanab last year that had two 1 Gig Up-links to the internet, using the 5 Ghz band in the evening made a noticeable speed difference in my Dropbox download speeds.    The proprietor mentioned to me that almost no one ever uses his 5 Ghz band.  He was a nerd that happened to own a campground and wanted everyone in the park to know they could do whatever they wanted to his network.

[bigbillsd]

6 minutes ago, docj said:

This is a widely repeated claim but very few of the people repeating it don't have any idea how complicated it would be to try to implement it.   I have yet to ever see anyone provide actual evidence of this having happened to them.  All the reports are of the kind where "my friend told me that is what th

 

I had three parks cut off my MAC during our round the country trip last summer, out of about 60 campgrounds.  Unfortunately I did not write down which ones they were.    It is simple for them to do if they use commercial equipment like Cisco or Ubiquity.    Also simple on those systems to limit bandwidth per MAC or even Firewall each MAC off from all others on that network.  But how knows who is actually managing it.   I think the original campground that wouldn't allow my Nanostation connect was using Tangonet.   That's when I had the idea to use a MAC from Apple.  -Bill  

 

 

[eddie1261]

18 hours ago, docj said:

You may have thought you tested it but I suspect you really hadn't disconnected your WAN.  It simply doesn't work that way.

Seriously? Seriously?

Wow. How insulting can you be? You are telling an MCSE and CCNE that he doesn't know what his WAN is??? I disconnected the WAN twice. I both powered off the modem that connects to Spectrum's cable AND disconnected the cable that goes from my D-Link router to that cable modem. This is local source to local destination, not youtube. All on 192.168.xx.xx IPs. And streamed 2 of my 450 movies just fine. And you DARE to say I didn't disconnect my WAN?? Have YOU ever tested this theory with locally stored content? Both of those devices, the computer and the Chromecast, (the only receiving device on the TV) pull IP from the D-Link, do they not?? So why do you say I need to introduce a WAN IP? You want to drive to Ohio and see it work for yourself?? Open the movie in a tab in Chrome and stream it with the Videostream plugin. You DO NOT have to be on the internet to use a LAN.

Didn't disconnect my WAN..... Wow. In- fricking-deed..... 20 years of building networks and you doubt if I know what my WAN is?

Research Videostream for Google Chromecast. The description:

Play your own local videos on your Chromecast or Android TV directly from your computer (PC, Mac, Linux) - Subtitles supported! 

Note that it says both "local" and "direct" in the same sentence.

Time to add you to the ignore list if you are going to disrespect me this way. To tell me something won't work

THAT I HAVE ALREADY DONE!!!!!

Bye.

[Big5er]

3 hours ago, eddie1261 said:

Bye.

Ok. Bye bye.

[docj]

On 3/11/2018 at 6:53 PM, eddie1261 said:

Have YOU ever tested this theory with locally stored content?

At the time I made my post the discussion had been about streaming video, not displaying stored content.  There are a number of ways to display stored content; personally I use PLEX to a Roku for that purpose.   Sorry if my post offended you; that was no the intention.

[RV_]

Bill

On 3/11/2018 at 6:19 PM, bigbillsd said:

I had three parks cut off my MAC during our round the country trip last summer, out of about 60 campgrounds.  Unfortunately I did not write down which ones they were.    It is simple for them to do if they use commercial equipment like Cisco or Ubiquity.    Also simple on those systems to limit bandwidth per MAC or even Firewall each MAC off from all others on that network.  But how knows who is actually managing it.   I think the original campground that wouldn't allow my Nanostation connect was using Tangonet.   That's when I had the idea to use a MAC from Apple.  -Bill 

Bill,

Your switch from Discussing MACs to Macs as MAC too was funny if humor was your intent.

The one from Apple is a Mac. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Apple+store+MAC&pc=MOZI&form=MOZLBR

A MAC however, is a Media Access Control address:

"MAC address

A media access control address (MAC address), also called physical address, is a unique identifier assigned to network interfaces for communications on the physical network segment. MAC addresses are used as a network address for most IEEE 802 network technologies, including Ethernet and WiFi."

https://www.bing.com/search?q=what+is+a+MAC+address+mean&pc=MOZI&form=MOZLBR

 

I think Networks are complicated enough for many people, that we need to be very clear on our acronyms.

 

 

[bigbillsd]

On 3/13/2018 at 4:34 PM, RV_ said:

Bill

Bill,

Your switch from Discussing MACs to Macs as MAC too was funny if humor was your intent.

The one from Apple is a Mac. https://www.bing.com/search?q=Apple+store+MAC&pc=MOZI&form=MOZLBR

A MAC however, is a Media Access Control address:

"MAC address

A media access control address (MAC address), also called physical address, is a unique identifier assigned to network interfaces for communications on the physical network segment. MAC addresses are used as a network address for most IEEE 802 network technologies, including Ethernet and WiFi."

https://www.bing.com/search?q=what+is+a+MAC+address+mean&pc=MOZI&form=MOZLBR

 

I think Networks are complicated enough for many people, that we need to be very clear on our acronyms.

 

 

Sorry, but my spell check always changes it to MAC.   So i have no clue what you are referring to.  And this forum software logs edits.  -Bill