no Repeater mode? RAX49 routers (house-to-house wifi)

[Kasey-K]

I'm a lucky man. Got two houses on a street located 500 feet apart. Been shooting a Wi-Fi beam from house #1 downhill to house #2 for many years now; just bought TWO Nighthawks to "upgrade" my system.

BUT whereas the unit at (signal-receiving) house, the old-school, weak ASUS router has the following modes available: ROUTER/REPEATER/ACCESS POINT; the Brand-New screaming-fast, powerful Nighthawk has only (2) modes ROUTER ~or~ AP.

from my initial research it seems that AP routers are supposed to be *Hard-Wired* to the "primary point" router. So. I'm wondering if I can use the RAX Nighthawk router at house #2 to receive a signal at all?

I did notice in Advanced Settings an option to enable: VLAN / Bridge Settings.

Do I need to set up a wi-fi Bridge system?

[michaelkenward]

---

@Kasey-K wrote:

.... the Brand-New screaming-fast, powerful Nighthawk has only (2) modes ROUTER ~or~ AP.

---

Wireless bridge (repeater) mode seems to be vanishing from Netgear's range. Maybe other brands too.

There are plenty of RAX models with repeater mode, including the RAX48 and RAX50, but not the RAX49 .

Instead of buying a router and then disabling most of its features, you could have bought a device designed to do what you want. Netgear has a whole range of repeaters.

WiFi Boosters & Extenders | Wifi Range Extenders | NETGEAR

[Kasey-K]

I REALLY am a lucky man. for: RAX49 (unit #2 is still in shipping carton) and I can simply return it to Best Buy.  Are you suggesting that all I need at house #2 is a simple Wifi repeater, (not a router with extra features at all?).

I just now, finished a phone call with a Netgear 24/7 tech assistant, who said it is super easy to enable the 2nd RAX49 to operate as a Bridge device. (he also described "repeater" as an old or obsolete mode).

However, if I would be wasting the fancy features of the second router by running it as a bridge device, then your point is well appreciated and I should start shopping for a suitable device.

Because of "Holiday Madness" the return policy for routers at Best Buy has been extended from 14 days to a two month period. Pretty cool, really.

[FURRYe38]

Let's get something understood, for NG routers, "Bridge" mode is a wireless "bridge" mode that makes the router into a wireless client and makes it connect wirelessly to a host wifi signal thus any ethernet devices can connect to this router and get services. No additional wireless or broadcasts are seen in this "Bridge" mode. 

"Repeater" mode, when seen on those models that support it, connects to a host wifi signal then re-broadcasts that signal for other wifi devices to connect too and ethernet devices can connect as well in this mode. 

If you don't see Repeater mode under Advanced tab/Router Mode section or mentioned in the user manual, then this model doesn't support this mode. 

[Kasey-K]

So do I even need a Router (with repeater mode included as a feature), stationed at house # 2. Or do I simply need a good-quality Wifi extender unit?

it seems like those are my two options:

1) router with repeater mode 

~ OR ~

2) a Wifi extender

any comment about the pro's and con's of either move?

[michaelkenward]

---

@Kasey-K wrote:

So do I even need a Router (with repeater mode included as a feature), stationed at house # 2. Or do I simply need a good-quality Wifi extender unit?

That could be down to personal preference and budget.

Are you convinced that you can get a wifi signal to travel between the two buildings? 500 feet is a heck of a stretch for wifi. That is about twice the range I have seen quoted for domestic kit.

It may be that you need something a bit fancier than a consumer grade extender.

[Kasey-K]

as I stated in initial posting, I have been sending wifi house-to-house successfully for years. Now that being said, I am "helping" a bit with low-loss, minimal-length cables connected to high-DBI-gain external, directional antennae aimed directly between point A & B. I've even experimented with 4 watt and 5 watt amplifiers.

However the new RAX 49 is sending a decent signal down the hill, with NO amplification devices added. It helps that there is not a single tree or shrub in the way of line-of-sight connectivity.

As I want to have Ethernet connected devices AND Wifi signal in house #2 it seems that Bridge is not an option.

[Kasey-K]

oops typo. 4 watt and 8 watt amplifiers. not 5 watt.

[plemans]

If it was me trying to go that distance, I'd invest in a point to point system like netgear's Airbridge setup. 

You'd have faster speeds and a more stable connection. 

Pushing wifi 500ft even with upgraded antenna's is going to have slower speeds. 

What actual speeds do you pay for? 

What speeds do you get at the house thats 500ft away? 

[Razor512]

While I have not use the RAX49 specifically, I have used the RAX50 and RAX45, and a few others in the AX line. They have been making some UI changes, thus some will have a dedicated UI option to simply switch to it a wireless bridge. while other models have it buried in a submenu where you have to go to the web UI > Advanced> Advanced Setup> Wireless Settings> check the box for "use other operation mode", and then you can set up the wireless bridge.

One annoying limitation that wireless bridge mode disables the AP functionality of the router, even though it is only using one of the radios for the backhaul, and there is nothing really stopping them from adding an option to use the other WiFi radio as a single band AP, e.g., if you use the 5GHz radio as a backhaul, then allow the 2.4GHz radio to still work as an AP.

Beyond that, the wireless bridge functions are quite good, especially in terms of performance since unlike normal where you will have a WiFi router with a 990milliwatt transmit power, and a smartphone with a 50-100milliwatt transmit power, you have devices on both ends will higher gain antennas as well as a better transmit power, thus they can maintain a stronger connection, better PHY rates, and fewer corrupt frames.

The Netgear range extenders are more purpose built for this use case and for both their newer WiFi routers and extenders, but on both cases, they use pretty high end radios and RF front ends on them, thus receiver sensitivity is really good.

The main thing I see lacking with Netgear's product line, especially for your use case,is a lack of consumer point to point directional units, thus you often see people gravitating towards things like the Ubiquiti nanobeam products for point to point since they will maintain a higher PHY rate over those distances, purely due to the high gain directional antenna.

[plemans]

@Razor512 they do have one. WBC502 | Wireless AirBridge | NETGEAR Support

[michaelkenward]

Depending on the demand at the other end, people have experimented with the Orbi RBS50Y outdoor satellite in simiilar circumstances.

It has both Orbi and non-Orbi modes, although I have never persuaded my (beta) model to work outside Orbi mode.

[Kasey-K]

Thanks for all the detailed responses. I've decided to go forward and connect the two RAX49 units on wireless bridge mode.

But it would be really helpful to know about the four antennas. Are all four antennas dual band? Or is each individual antenna dedicated to the 2.4ghz OR the 5ghz band?

At house #1 I would aim the 2.4 signal down the street to bridge, and use the remaining antennas to enjoy 5ghz inside the rooms closest to the Parental unit.

I was talking with this Tech dude at TrendNet, who was suggesting that all manufacturers, and each router model differs in how this radio signal is handled over antennas. 

The basic user manual for RAX49 (AX5300), does not feature a detailed schematic of the machine; but obviously such a diagram must exist. Anybody know where I can view it?

[Razor512]

Sadly for these specific models, they have not offered detailed info on which antennas handle the 2.4GHz band, thus the only way to really find out, would be to do additional testing such as weighing the antennas to find which are dual band and which are single band, or if you can get access to a luggage x-ray machine, then run the antennas through to see which has ones have 2 differently sized antenna elements. If all are the same then there is a chance that the WiFi router is capable of routing RF signals to any of the antennas, and simply picking the 2 best ones for the 2.4GHz at any given time depending on client location, at which point it will not matter as much on which antennas you choose to angle.

Another method would be trial and error in terms of seeing which antennas can be angled. The antennas have a polar pattern largely shaped like a fat doughnut or bagel for the 5GHz band, and a shape more like an apple for the 2.4GHz band. Roughly 6.6dBi for the 5GHz band (around a 30 degree vertical broadcast angle for the bulk of the RF energy,with smaller amounts going straight up or in steeper angles.), and 3.73 dBi for the 2.4GHz band.

For that WiFi router line, all 4 antennas can handle the 5GHz band, and 2 will handle the 2.4GHz band.

Overall, based on the antennas, it is best to position them where there the center of the doughnut signal pattern is centered around where the client devices will be. The 2.4GHz band will be less sensitive to antenna position given large the vertical polar pattern will be for that band, thus in nearly all situations, they can simply remain perfectly vertical without issue while for 5GHz, depending on the environment, you may need to angle them to match the elevation of the client devices.

If you need more info, you can look at the FCC reports at https://gov.fccid.io/PY319400466