NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
The gig is up -- the new AX12 will be D.O.A.
The AX12 appears to have NO DFS channel support.
This is according to Netgear's own product page (no DFS mention; whereas routers with DFS support mention that), and FCC documents (PY317300397)...
duckware wrote:
Another reason to avoid the RAX120. The RAX120 uses 802.11ax -- that is supposed to work great with LOTS and LOTS of wireless devices. But then Netgear cuts you off at the knees, and won't let you use all of those of wireless devices (limit 32)!
https://kb.netgear.com/24043/How-many-clients-can-you-connect-wirelessly-to-a-NETGEAR-router
There is no reference in this KB entry, neither to the RAX120 nor the RAX80, nor to the R9000 for example, too.
There are pure practical reasons why an enormous amount of concurrent wireless clients on the same radio and channels does not make sense - neither on the older nor on Wi-Fi 6.
duckware wrote:
PS: Anyone know if there is a limit to the number of 'wired' devices a Netgear router allows?
The more interesting information is the number of concurrent NAT sessions. At some point, every NAT router has to close and re-use the oldest NAT sessions when new connections are established. The methods for this are varying, depending on the router software design.
It's amazing such basic information is not part of the official specs and data sheets for what are supposed to be top-of-the-line consumer routers, indeed.
A large number of wireless clients is happening right now. Each person in my household has a phone, tablet, notebook computer, game console, and other devices -- each wireless. Then many rooms in the house have Smart TVs and Blu-ray player, etc. Plus four ring cams. Plus wireless thermostats. This is only going to get much worse.
And that is expressly what 802.11ax was designed for (see "Provide improvements in the number of clients supported by an access point" at https://blogs.cisco.com/wireless/802-11ax-the-sixth-generation-of-wi-fi). A large number of wifi clients in a small space.
My current wireless situation right now (family of four) is pushing the limit of 32. Now of course, most wireless devices are just sitting there (no active traffic), which is why it works just fine right now. But the situation will only get worse over time. And I only have a family size of 4!
The limit of 32 wireless for Netgear routers is artificial and is going to be a brick wall (a show stopper) for a lot of people. If the new RAX models can't handle more than 32 wireless clients, the router has a value of $0 to me.
duckware wrote:
A large number of wireless clients is happening right now. Each person in my household has a phone, tablet, notebook computer, game console, and other devices -- each wireless. Then many rooms in the house have Smart TVs and Blu-ray player, etc. Plus four ring cams. Plus wireless thermostats. This is only going to get much worse.
Honestly? For such a set-up it's time to abandon the idea of a single central Wi-Fi router. Migrate to a wireless system with multiple wired access points.
schumaku, Yes! Two adults and two children in a 2140 sq ft single story home, with the router in the 'middle' of the home, with no wireless device more than 35 feet away from the router. YES, I fully expect any new 802.11ax in 2019 to be able to handle that situation just fine! And at the maximum distance away from the router, I get over 700 Mbps PHY (2x2 MIMO, so 866 max) speeds, which I find very good.
And if Netgear can't, I know of a great alternative. I find it crazy that there is enterprise grade Wave2 802.11ac hardware cheaper than Netgear's home class routers.
But to your point, installing AP's all over will only work if Netgear routers have a much higher limit on the number of "wired" devices. Do you know if Netgear routers will work with 100 wired devices?
schumaku schumaku wrote:
Honestly? For such a set-up it's time to abandon the idea of a single central Wi-Fi router. Migrate to a wireless system with multiple wired access points.
Totally agree. From client numbers we are building a high density environment with lots of wireless devices and ever growing. I adopted the model used where my group supported over 100 hospitals with all of their wireless requirements. A central router, no wireless on router, and distributed AP's. Gives me much better coverage for $450 over what a $400 Netgear or other vendor can provide. Claimed support for 200 clients per AP. Not sure about that, but sure indicates more then the seeming 32 limit Netgear gives. The Unifi gateway sits at 0 to 1% CPU usage and AP's hang around 5% in my limited environment so lots of room there CPU wise.
Could do something similar with Netgear products of course. Just decided if I was going this way and spend $400 plus then go more toward the commercial side as I do not need/want the parental controls etc Netgear provides. I subscribe more toward control the child rather then trying to control their environment. Worked well with the girl that came to live with us 4 years ago when 15. Off to university now.
