0

My in-laws own a campground and are looking to provide free WiFi for their guests. They are a small operation and are on a budget, so I have decided to help look into this.

Here are some basic details about the campground:

  • Furthest distance from originating modem/router source will be approx. 1500 feet
  • There is a gradual elevation change (lower to higher) over approx. 500 feet of the 1500

Will a number of wireless routers put in bridge mode successfully pass along a connection at that length? Is an actual wireless repeater any better at the job?

Dave
  • 25,297
  • 10
  • 57
  • 69
armadadrive
  • 197
  • 1
  • 1
  • 13

2 Answers2

1

The maximum CAT-5e cable is 100m (328ft) before you get significant transmission interference or loss altogether. To overcome this you can use repeaters or switches that will reproduce the data. I would say to use ethernet (or even optical if your budget can extend to it) as its range is far greater than wifi. At your switches you could then install and configure wireless access points that are connected to a DHCP and proxy server so that you can manage sites, or even provide a captive portal to preconfigure devices to work on your network.

You could even install multiple repeaters to cover your range: a similar question was put up on here a while ago: Is it possible to have multiple repeaters in a network with just 1 uniform SSID?

Community
  • 1
Kinnectus
  • 10,438
  • 3
  • 28
  • 41
  • 2
    You forget that every repeater will reduce the bandwidth of the network by a certain percentage. This means on the edge of the property that speeds will be horrible. Sticking to just switches to extend the network then connecting acess points would build the best network. The problem is 1500ft is alot of propery. I assume were are talking square feet. – Ramhound May 27 '14 at 13:21
  • Yes, 1500ft would be quite vast if it is the maximum straight line distance... – Kinnectus May 27 '14 at 13:27
  • Actually, it's more like 1500 ft in a straight line. The RV's are all in a row and are the typical users requesting/expecting wireless. On the other side (which is 290 ft, so square footage of the campground is roughly 450k) are tent sites. Those are not a real priority. – armadadrive May 27 '14 at 13:43
  • Do you know the total area of your site? – Kinnectus May 27 '14 at 14:02
  • Meaning the 1500ft x width? Not specifically, no. Imagine the length of two campers, assuming one in a camping spot and a pole for an AP a short distance away. – armadadrive May 27 '14 at 14:10
  • I'm going to guess no more than 1500ft x 100ft (460m x 30m). You could run a set of cables down one side of your "460m" at 100m intervals, each terminated by a switch to "daisy-chain" them together (not the best solution because you have no redundancy) and then connect a wireless AP into each switch to provide your wifi. You will need to have a DHCP server and manage address reservations for your APs and IP ranges. – Kinnectus May 27 '14 at 14:26
  • I've had an "enlightening" read and, for the fairly small setup you're attempting, this guide might help: http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/print.php/3797291 – Kinnectus May 27 '14 at 14:38
  • Thanks! That tutorial gave me a much better understanding of why bandwidth gets lost over repeaters/bridges. – armadadrive May 27 '14 at 15:36
1

Either dedicated repeaters or AP's will do it, but your variable either assumed or forgotten is obstruction and height.

Omnidirectional AP's are always best served the higher you can get them in this case since you don't seem to mention the option of elevating hundreds of feet off the ground and end users.

If this campground is thick foliage, you have to factor vegetation such as what types of line of sight "alleys" you'll faithfully have by seasons and wind.

I know this from my experiences pen testing WiFi from various surreptitious distances and my effective range worsens when seemingly smaller / thinner obstructions interrupt longer range probes.

Good site testing will help make the right decisions even if you can't take readings over the entirety of seasons, assuming you're uninitiated but comfortable with LINUX in monitor mode, a basic copy of Kismet will provide accurate readings.

Testing clients with AP's and WireShark on LINUX can output decibel levels by client (DOES Windows version of WireShark too, didn't see the option but didn't try to hard to determine if Windows version does)

Even Windows either NetStumbler or WiFiNetwork Monitor by Nirsoft gives detailed more than anecdotal signal readings than the five bars since your variance is literally 20% but worst, the Windows WiFi meter is delayed and you're reading the signal strength a few seconds ago than anything resembling real time.

Best testing in my opinion is high noon or bright sunny days when the sun is typically brightest, WiFi is microwave and bright sun can hamper signals, capacity planning for this time of day can go far ensuring the rest of the users days will have ample coverage.

whatchaDoForWeekends
  • 43
  • 3