Mixing "n" Express with "b/g" Wireless Network

> I'm setting up a wireless network for a friend (no good deed goes
> unpunished...) who has 802.11b/g Airport Extreme, an 802.11b/g Airport
> Express, and an 802.11n Airport Express. I'm setting this up as a "wireless
> network" and not as a "wireless distribution system (WDS)".
>
> The wireless network is slow, e.g., web pages take 30-120 seconds to load.
>
> Is there any issue with mixing an "n" Express with other "b/g" components?

I have an Airport Extreme-N as base station with an Express-N set up as WDS
and seems to work fine, tho Apple's interface for both seems like something
out of OS 7. Why you can't use a browser to work with the network is beyond
me. Make sure you're on the same channel, i.e. Ch 1 or 11 and that you're
using NAT. If that doesn't help maybe you should use the Express as the base
from DSL and the Extreme as the bridge.
--
James Connolly
form&funktion

On May 12, 2008, at 11:05 AM, James Connolly wrote:

>> I'm setting up a wireless network for a friend (no good deed goes
>> unpunished...) who has 802.11b/g Airport Extreme, an 802.11b/g
>> Airport
>> Express, and an 802.11n Airport Express. I'm setting this up as a
>> "wireless
>> network" and not as a "wireless distribution system (WDS)".
>>
>> The wireless network is slow, e.g., web pages take 30-120 seconds
>> to load.
>>
>> Is there any issue with mixing an "n" Express with other "b/g"
>> components?
>
> I have an Airport Extreme-N as base station with an Express-N set up
> as WDS
> and seems to work fine, tho Apple's interface for both seems like
> something
> out of OS 7. Why you can't use a browser to work with the network is
> beyond
> me. Make sure you're on the same channel, i.e. Ch 1 or 11 and that
> you're
> using NAT. If that doesn't help maybe you should use the Express as
> the base
> from DSL and the Extreme as the bridge.
> --

Doesn't a router slow down to the lowest speed used on the network? I
have mostly g devices, but one old iBook with a b chip, and when
that's on the network, I find all my transfers are slower.


Kirk
                    Co-author of: Podcasting Pocket Guide
                      http://www.mcelhearn.com/ppg.html
                - - - - - -
              Read my blog: Kirkville -- http://www.mcelhearn.com
           Musings, Opinion and Miscellanea, on Macs, iPods and more

am 12.05.2008 11:01 Uhr schrieb tidbits-talktidbits.com unter
tidbits-talktidbits.com:

> I'm setting up a wireless network for a friend (no good deed goes
> unpunished...) who has 802.11b/g Airport Extreme, an 802.11b/g Airport
> Express, and an 802.11n Airport Express. I'm setting this up as a "wireless
> network" and not as a "wireless distribution system (WDS)".
>
> The wireless network is slow, e.g., web pages take 30-120 seconds to load.
>
> Is there any issue with mixing an "n" Express with other "b/g" components?

Well, when mixing slow and fast wireless components, the whole network is
"slow". However, even with a "slow" network web pages ought to open
instantaneously. Even a "slow" network has enough bandwidth for the amount
of data a web page contains.

802.11b transfers up to 11 MBit/s

802.11g transfers up to 54 MBit/s
    
802.11n transfers up to 540 MBit/s

My DSL line has a speed of roughly 6000 kBit/s which are about 6 Mbit/s - so
even a network with only 802.11b oughta handle that.

When web pages take 20 to 30 seconds to open, something else is amiss...

Udo

At 4:04 PM -0700 5/11/08, christinestinson wrote:
>I'm setting up a wireless network for a friend (no good deed goes
>unpunished...) who has 802.11b/g Airport Extreme, an 802.11b/g
>Airport Express, and an 802.11n Airport Express. I'm setting this up
>as a "wireless network" and not as a "wireless distribution system
>(WDS)".
>
>The wireless network is slow, e.g., web pages take 30-120 seconds to load.
>
>Is there any issue with mixing an "n" Express with other "b/g" components?

You can set up an Apple 802.11n network in a number of ways. Just a
three of them, in increasing order of speed:
  - b/g Compatible
  - n-only (2.4 GHz)
  - n-only (5 GHz/wide) (but less range)

I tested my this myself after I saw some AppleInsider tests. And
found the same results.

<http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/04/01/exploring_time_capsule_10_100_1000_ethernet_vs_802_11g_n_wireless_networking.html>

However, I don't know that explains what is going on with your
friend's network. It sounds like you are talking about interference,
rather than simply slower than expected speeds. You can use iStumbler
(free) to check what networks are on what channels that might be
interfering.

<http://www.istumbler.net/>

Otherwise, I would suggest some fairly obvious trouble shooting steps:
  - try to turn off one unit at a time to see if one them in
particular is causing the problem.
  - swap around some of the equipment (especially the two Expresses to
see if that fixes it).
  - check to see changing the "radio mode" of n Express fixes the problem).


--
=Alex Hoffman
Leadership, Policy & Politics
Teachers College, Columbia University

On 5/12/2008 12:35 PM, "Kirk McElhearn" wrote:
> Doesn't a router slow down to the lowest speed used on the network? I
> have mostly g devices, but one old iBook with a b chip, and when
> that's on the network, I find all my transfers are slower.

Depends on what protocols you're using. If you've got a b/g network, putting
a b device on the network does indeed slow the network down considerably.
However, if you're talking about an n/g network, that's not the case. To
oversimplify: With 802.11n, when a g device is actively using the network,
the router goes into a mode where it quickly switches back and forth between
g and n; the max network speed is slower than n-only, but it's not reduced
all the way to g levels. Once the g device is done transmitting/receiving,
the network reverts back to n speeds. (All this switching happens
automatically, very quickly, and regularly, but the net result is that
having g devices on an n network is not the crippling problem that having b
devices on a g network was.)

I have the same three airports. My solution was to set up the Extreme (b/g) and Express (b/g) as a WDS, and then set up the Extreme (n) as an "N" system only, using only the 5 GHz band to eliminate interference. For machines that can connect to N, they can get the full advantage of N's speed which, subjectively, approaches 100BaseT. Everyone else uses the older system. Note that the "N" Extreme has greater range than the B/G Extreme, but not as much as the B/G WDS.