Will Orbi support Arlo natively?

[Hdg]

Got an email from Arlo introducing Orbi.. So Orbi will natively support Arlo right?  Like the R7000 was supposed to?

[DarrenM]

Hello Hdg

Very sorry about the confusion with this email. The was email sent to all Arlo customers to introduce the Orbi but this is a whole separate system for your Home Networking and Wifi needs it does not have integrated support for Arlo.

DarrenM

[Hdg]

Dang!  Let this be my vote for Arlo functionality to be added!  (it's just a separate wifi SSID after all!)

[INTOWILD]

I second that vote!

[GadgetGuy]

...and I while I wait for that, I just spent 400 dollars to imrprove my bad FIOS wifi connection.
I really like my Arlo, so I am ready to enjoy Orbi. (for the record, I did not like Vuezone).

[jackistired]

Yes, I would buy one if it has built in Arlo support.

[Mikey94025]

I love my Arlo cameras, but why is it so important for some Netgear router owners to have integrated Arlo support?  Is it so terrible to keep the extra Arlo base station?  For me the quality of my in-house wifi is more important than having an additional box.  Yes, it's a good marketing mechanism to encourage more Arlo customers to purchase a Netgear router.  Is the converse true -- Is not integrating with Arlo a good reason not to buy an Orbi?

[Hdg]

Logical answer: the 'Arlo Base Station' is nothing but a wireless router. I ALREADY HAVE a wireless router, so why do I need another one? Just let the Arlo cameras use the router I already have.

Technical reason: the 2.4 ghz spectrum is incredibly overcrowded due to all the wireless routers. In fact, of the 12 available channels, only 3 (1,6,12) are truly isolated. All other channels overlap eachoher (each channel overlaps the 5 nearest channels). Why add another unnecessary wireless network to even further crowd the overcrowded spectrum?

Yes I know the Arlo Base Station tries to make its channel match the channel of the wireless router it is being used with, but only when it first boots up. This means unless the user pays strict attention to the channel settings and reboot sequences (when a reboot is needed for either wireless router) chances are the channels will at some point overlap.

This is a pain (if the main router is set to 'Auto' channel selection, then it needs to be rebooted first, and then the arlo base station, after the main router starts broadcasting it's SSID - for anyone wondering)

[Mikey94025]

Thanks, I never thought about how my Arlo base station selected its wireless channel or how it could even tell.  Fun read: https://community.netgear.com/t5/Arlo-Wire-Free-camera/Is-it-possible-to-change-the-wifi-channel/td-....  They seem to want the Arlo camera traffic separated in channel from their household wifi traffic (using one of the 3 isolated channels).  If a single router publishes 2 different SSIDs on the same channel then is there no interference/performance degredation compared to separate routers using 2 isolated channels?

[TheEther]

If a single router broadcasts 2 SSIDs on one channel then there may be performance degradation.  The router has to share one channel between two SSIDs.  This is worse than using 2 isolated channels but it is better than using 2 overlapping channels.  The Arlo thread you linked has a link to a really good article that explains why.

http://www.metageek.com/training/resources/adjacent-channel-congestion.html

I don't own an Arlo system, but I would also want it to run on an isolated channel.  Hopefully, the Orbi satellite uses a channel isolated from the router like any multi-AP system should.

[jackistired]

And if Orbi has built in Arlo support, it will allow greater ranges for Alro camera placements.

[Hdg]

"If a single router broadcasts 2 SSIDs on one channel then there may be performance degradation."

Can you offer an explanation or link to justification of this claim?  

EDIT: I just did a quick google and realized that the management traffic is duplicated per additional SSID, but this is trivial with 802.11N speeds.  (http://revolutionwifi.blogspot.com/2010/10/limit-ssids-data-rates-to-maintain.html)

But this now beggs the question: Why have a separate SSID at all?  Since the cameras connect by WPS, if Netgear simply allowed the cameras to connect to any SSID, and use the router's QoS capability to managed the arlo traffic (if even necessary, since Arlo cameras have their own local storage for clips prior to transmitting to base station/cloud), then all would be solved.

[INTOWILD]

That's exactly what I was hoping Orbi would do...extend the range of my Arlo cameras. Sounds like no such luck.

[TheEther]

There is only so much bandwidth a single channel can accommodate.  It's like two sets of cars trying to use a single lane.  Given enough traffic, the lane becomes congested.  OTOH, if one of the SSIDs is mostly idle or overall traffic levels are low, then there will be little to no degradation.  

With two channels, there is twice as much bandwidth available.  Each set of cars now has its own lane.

As you mentioned, there is additional management traffic (beacons and such) for each added SSID, but the overhead is nominal.

If I'm not mistaken, the Arlo Q series doesn't use a base station.  Instead, it utilizes your existing SSID.