Hi guys,
I'm looking at building a wired/wireless router from a spare P4 box I have,
and I'm thinking wireless N is the way to go. I was wondering though if the
nics are backwards compatible with A/B/G ?
Frankly if this will be kept running continuously, you'd be
better off buying a small all integrated board and CPU based
around a Via C3 or C7 or something similar as it will use
much less power, paying for itself in some reasonable period
of time (I'm too lazy to do the math but vaguely recall
Newegg and ClubIt both have at least one such board w/CPU
for $60 or less).
Typical NICs support only A, only B (if several years old),
or B/G if more recent. Some now also support N, if the
small cost difference is not important and considering the
purpose of the system I would pick one supporting B/G/N.
Do you really need a separate computer for this? Check out
DD-WRT firmware for wifi routers and which ones it supports,
you might be able to do this cheaper, using less
power/space/noise, and have the P4 box available for some
other use.
Also, I'm thinking a seperate antenna would be best as the router will sit
out of sight and not atop my desk, etc. Could I just buy a couple of
omni-directional antennas and attach to the NIC ?
Yes but there will be some loss from the cable. We dont'
know exactly what your needs are for this box, how much
control you need over the routing so it's hard to say what
to choose. A separate access point is one option, or if
you need a lot of control then a separate router and then
configure the P4 system as a firewall proxy.
Another option I considered was a combination of a wired router and a good
access point (like Minitar, etc) to provide the wirless capability.
You could do this, but what's wrong with a wireless router?
One last thing, is there any real performance difference in having only 2
two antennas vs 3 antennas ? From what I read only the two with the best
signal are used anyway right ?
That is correct AFAIK, though if antenna differences are
very important it could be that having a separate access
point located elsewhere is the way to provide best coverage,
and ideally that one connected over ethernet instead of
repeater to keep the airwaves free instead of halving the
throughput.
Yes there are dozens of personal/home routers, but after the trouble I have
had with every one I've bought, I'm not going there (not unless they have
one with real ram and cpu - not some equivlent of a pentium 1 with 2 MB
ram).
What trouble? A router does not need a lot of memory and
modern PC CPU - it just isn't a job requiring a lot of
memory and processing performance. Sometimes slow
performance is really just poor signal quality, that the
environment requires an additional access point or
directional antennas if there's a lot of background noise
from distant sources.
Two of the most common problems are overheating and buggy
firmware. Thus I suggested DD-WRT above and as needed, pop
open the router casing, epoxy a heatsink onto the networking
processor, and drill a few supplimental fan holes into the
casing. This can work very well and AFAIK everyone who
has done it prefers it to a separate computer doing the
routing - unless you need more control than the standalone
router provides in it's firmware, but DD-WRT also improves
upon the typical feature sets other firmware allows. My
router running DD-WRT has only gone down one time in more
than a year's use and then only because of an extended power
outtage. It is a Buffalo model no longer available due to
some kind of patent infringment issue (IIRC) but Linksys
WRT54GL is very similar, can also run DD-WRT.
There may be some 11n routers that can run DD-WRT too, you
might check out the DD-WRT forums where a lot of people
report and work through issues with specific routers. Even
if there are no issues I would still pop the top off, put a
heatsink on and drill more vent holes as it will also tend
to make the units last longer, preserving the capacitors by
keeping their temp lower.
