Remote network using a bridge for cameras?

Tazz 316 said:
I do have line of sight now as i moved to a new window but the link is at 124 Mbps it was at 10 Mbps -20.

As there name says nanobeam it seems hard to align them. The crap windows mounts don't help.
Click to expand...

Are you using the maximum channel width? What model Nanobeam did you get and what is the distance between them?

A rx signal strength of -20dBm is too strong. You may need to turn the power down or intentionally misalign. -45dBm is the sweet spot.
 
Last edited:
biggen said:
Are you using the maximum channel width? What model Nanobeam did you get and what is the distance between them?

A rx signal strength of -20dBm is too strong. You may need to turn the power down or intentionally misalign. -45dBm is the sweet spot.
Click to expand...

I changed the channel width to 80 Mhz and it went to 175 Mbps, distance is 2,500 feet using NanoBeam 5AC.

BTW are there any passive PoE switches to power these things and a AP besides ubiquiti gear switches?
 
Tazz 316 said:
I changed the channel width to 80 Mhz and it went to 175 Mbps, distance is 2,500 feet using NanoBeam 5AC.

BTW are there any passive PoE switches to power these things and a AP besides ubiquiti gear switches?
Click to expand...
What’s the height above the tallest obstacle in the path? Keep in mind there is the fresnel zone to take into account. You need approximately 9 - 11 feet of clearance between the tallest obstacle in your path and the LOS signal at 5Ghz and a distance of .5 mile.

Proxim Wireless -Calculations,Definition: Fresnel Clearance Zone

Calculate the radius of the Fresnel Zone at its widest point by the formula listed below
www.proxim.com www.proxim.com

Not sure on the switch question. I know they come with a power brick so you have that option as well. The passive PoE thing does suck so I always use their switches to power them.
 
Working great not the fasted speed but good for a few IP cams.

It's strange because the UISP app says 100% connection.
 

Attachments

  • f (1).jpg
    f (1).jpg
    90.7 KB · Views: 16
Tazz 316 said:
I haven't been able to get it any better.
Click to expand...
Well that’s fine if it’s the best you can do and works well enough.

Looks like your transmit power is turned all the way down. Upping it may help. But it’s really about clear line of sight and minding the fresnel zone. If either one of those is a problem, signal strength suffers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns, TonyR and sebastiantombs
biggen said:
Your signal is bad. -83 which is close to the noise floor. Ideally you want around -60dBm.
Click to expand...
+1^^
-83 signal/-90 noise = NOT SO GOOD
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns
TonyR said:
+1^^
-83 signal/-90 noise = NOT SO GOOD
Click to expand...

Not sure how to get it any better, i have LOS it's probably the height as they are only 6 feet off the ground and behind a window. I'm not putting up a pole for a temporary link. Both points are on a hill.

But 250 Mbps link is fine for 3 IP cams, i only see the link using 11 Mbps and i have seen zero drops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sebastiantombs
Behind a window and only 6' off the ground at that distance (should be double that for that band). Those are the problems.

But if they work well enough for your needs, then thats what counts.
 
At 2500 feet you might have been better of with 2.4GHz.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns and biggen
I think that would have made a significant difference. Unfortunate they were out of stock.
 
Turns out that i get another opportunity to setup another link! A co-worker wants to setup a link that is 2200 feet LOS

This time the nanobeam 2.4 and 5Ghz are out of stock. He already has a router at his house i'm not sure what to use as a AP at his other house since he wants wi-fi there maybe a TP-Link AP?

To make things simple should i just use DHCP on the nanobeams?
 
Tazz 316 said:
To make things simple should i just use DHCP on the nanobeams?
Click to expand...
No.
Follow the recommended practice of assigning static IPs to them, as here ==>> airMAX - How to Configure a Point-to-Point Link (Layer 2, Transparent Bridge)
Assign IP's on the same subnet as your router's LAN and that are outside of the router's DHCP pool; in other words, if the router's DHCP pool is 192.168.1.49 to 192.168.1.99, use 192.168.1.200 to 192.168.1.250 for your static devices (cameras radios, printers, etc.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns, sebastiantombs and biggen
TonyR said:
No.
Follow the recommended practice of assigning static IPs to them, as here ==>> airMAX - How to Configure a Point-to-Point Link (Layer 2, Transparent Bridge)
Assign IP's on the same subnet as your router's LAN and that are outside of the router's DHCP pool; in other words, if the router's DHCP pool is 192.168.1.49 to 192.168.1.99, use 192.168.1.200 to 192.168.1.250 for your static devices (cameras radios, printers, etc.)
Click to expand...

Any suggestions on a AP? He didn’t give me a price range cheaper is better I’m sure.
 
Tazz 316 said:
Any suggestions on a AP? He didn’t give me a price range cheaper is better I’m sure.
Click to expand...

Regarding an indoor AP, I've got this one from TP-LINK, has performed great for 3 years, high power, dual band, 4 each gigabit LAN ports ==>> TP-Link AC1900 High Power Wireless Wi-Fi Gigabit Router, Ideal for Gaming (Archer C1900)

It supplies Wi-Fi to a garage cam and to a smart TV in master bedroom at back of house. I turned it into an AP only by disabling DHCP, assigned it a static LAN IP in the same subnet as the house router but outside the house router's DHCP pool, ran cable from one of its LAN ports to one of the house router's LAN ports. The TP-LINK's WAN port is unused in this role.

Just a FWIW, about the Ubiquiti devices, I've had great success with Nanostations ==>> Ubiquiti NanoStation M2 - Wireless Access Point - AirMax (NSM2US),White
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate IPCamTalk earns from qualifying purchases.
  • Like
Reactions: Tazz 316, looney2ns and sebastiantombs
I used locos many years ago 13 to be exact.

i still am undecided to use 2.4 or 5ghz for my friend. 2.4 is slower but not by much.

i guess the nanobeams have a tighter signal when compared to the nanostations making it harder for alignment.
 
Make the band choice based on distance and potential losses. 2.4GHz will "penetrate" better than 5GHz. Even over the same unobstructed path 2.4GHz can provide better signal strength than 5GHz. As with all things YMMV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: looney2ns and TonyR
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom