How-to: set up dual-band WiFi (and juice your downloads)
By Nilay Patel 
posted May 1st 2009 11:30AM
posted May 1st 2009 11:30AM
Yeah, we think you should make the switch.
If this looks familiar, it's time to go 5GHz.
Next, you're going to need to decide if you want to run a two-router setup or consolidate to a single box. If you've got a newer 5GHz-capable router already installed and you like it, we'd say your best bet is to just add a cheap second unit -- configuration isn't that hard, and you'll actually end up with a more flexible rig. On the other hand, if you've got an older router or you want the simplest possible networking setup, an upgrade to one of the new dual-bands on the market might be in order, since the experience is seamless -- Apple's AEBS will even auto-select the fastest connection for you. That said, after having run both setups, we've settled on having two routers -- it's a little messier, but the sysadmin in us secretly likes having redundant hardware in the house in case something goes awry. What can we say? We're nerds.
Single-router setup
If running two routers is too messy for you or you don't already have a 5GHz-capable router, a single dual-band router is the way to go -- the Airport Extreme we're going to use here is $179, but you can find other brands on sale for $100 or so. Plus, setup is dead simple -- ready?
And... that's it. If you've got a Mac-only household, you don't have to do anything else -- your Macs will automatically use the 5GHz network and get the higher speeds, while your other devices will hop on at 2.4GHz. However, we're guessing you're more like us, and you've got lots of different systems to support, so you might want to back off the full-auto here and split out the 5GHz network with its own SSID:
It's a little less seamless, but you'll be able to manually set all your 5GHz-capable devices to use the faster network. Setup with any other dual-band router is more or less the same -- just make sure you've got both radios going.
Two-router setup
Configure your main router as you normally would, giving it a unique SSID and selecting 5GHz-only operation where appropriate. Generally this'll be under a wireless settings menu, but different manufacturers put it in different places.
Next, make sure you're set up to use "wide channels." This bundles two 802.11n channels together, and it's a big reason for the speed boost. Again, this can be hidden -- on an Airport you have to click the "Wireless Options" button.
And that's it -- you can begin enjoying 5GHz immediately. You'll notice that file transfers are much faster, HD video streaming is now a realistic possibility, and wonder of wonders, you've become much more attractive overnight. But what about your cellphones and older devices? Let's get that 2.4GHz access point set up and bring them back online.
Plug in your el-cheapo router and do what you need to do to skip the guided setup. You don't need it. Connect to whatever default network it creates out of the box, point your browser to the setup screen (typically located at 10.0.1.1, 10.0.2.1, or 192.168.1.1), and look for the access point config screen:
The IP address here should be in the NAT range as the one used by your main router, so make sure you don't put in a 10.0 address if you're runnning a 192.168 network or vice versa. (Check your other network to make sure.) Other than that, all you really have to do is pick an unique SSID that's different from your 5GHz network and set a password, and you're all set. Connect a short Ethernet cable between the LAN (not WAN!) ports of both routers, and enjoy -- you've got the best of both worlds.
Whichever way you choose to go, we're pretty sure you'll be happier running at 5GHz -- it makes wireless networking seem like a viable alternative to Ethernet, which is not something we ever thought we'd say. And besides, you needed a weekend project, right?
Plug in your el-cheapo router and do what you need to do to skip the guided setup. You don't need it. Connect to whatever default network it creates out of the box, point your browser to the setup screen (typically located at 10.0.1.1, 10.0.2.1, or 192.168.1.1), and look for the access point config screen:
The IP address here should be in the NAT range as the one used by your main router, so make sure you don't put in a 10.0 address if you're runnning a 192.168 network or vice versa. (Check your other network to make sure.) Other than that, all you really have to do is pick an unique SSID that's different from your 5GHz network and set a password, and you're all set. Connect a short Ethernet cable between the LAN (not WAN!) ports of both routers, and enjoy -- you've got the best of both worlds.
Whichever way you choose to go, we're pretty sure you'll be happier running at 5GHz -- it makes wireless networking seem like a viable alternative to Ethernet, which is not something we ever thought we'd say. And besides, you needed a weekend project, right?
i need this in thine life
Is Engadget copying movies? RIAA may study the first screenshot really carefully for infringement!!!
Tom... you don't know what RIAA stands for, do you?
Good call engadget. i should have done this a long time ago. I purchased a time capsule and retired a linksys G access point. I think i'm going to set that up right now.
Ill have my ATV and Airport express up on 5GHZ and everything else on 2.4, at least until i upgrade the macbook pro..
sweetness
heh. and i doubt it... who pirates movies in .mov format?
Who says he's even pirating? Hasn't anyone moved their iTunes library from a small hard drive to a larger one to accommodate its growing sizer?
You don't need this in your life at all. You need a length of cat5e (£5-25), a hammer (£10), some cable clips (£3 for a box of 100), and 15 minutes to fix it up around your pad.
Speed: faster than wireless, more consistent than wireless.
Security: better than wireless.
Reliability: better than wireless.
Cost: lower than wireless.
Effort: lower than wireless (in the long term - once it's installed you won't have to touch it again).
I realise that wireless is a necessity for some people and in some situations (namely those involving laptops, gardens, hot tubs and hotchix), but the majority of people I know would be far better off with a bit of cable. You can even get them in pretty colours, and 5GHz isn't going to stay interference free forever...
@j_g...
Yeah, because the wife is going to be just fine with cat 6 cable clipped to her baseboards...
Craig, I'm sure she'll understand when you explain how important it is for you to be able to transfer data around your home at 1000Mb/s. If not, you can whip out the old 'WiFi cooks your ovaries' yarn and hope that she buys it. If that fails too, I suppose your only options are WLAN or divorce. I can't make that decision for you.
@j_g_puff
Cables tie down a laptop... ?
Great marriage advice btw :D
@tom: a quick google search shows that The Heaven Seventies are a band out of chicago, so this is probably a music video
@j_g_puff
You had me at "pretty colors".
Can't get THAT with Wi-fi!
: )
My Belkin router is about 8 years old. I think I it is time to buy a new router and I might as wqell get a two band router.
Try a netgear rangemax 802.11n router. I have one of their 2.4GHz ones, and files transfer at about 200Mbits/s anywhere in my house. Make sure you get one with gigabit wired ports, it is a huge waste if your other computers are on 100Mbps (I wired my whole house for gigabit, it's easy if you have an attic).
I recently replaced a working Netgear WNR854T (11n) with a Dlink DIR655. Dlink has a quality of service facility that can cope better with the demands of 5 PCs and two consoles in our house. I didn't go for dual band because none of these devices are 5Ghz, so that option is pointless. It will come, but I see no reason to rush into what is a more expensive option at this stage. Perhaps in a few years.
Apple sux.
so does your spelling...
Wow. Witty and smart? I bet you're a hit with the ladies. Why don't you head back in to your Mom's basement?
Talk about a paradox.
funny to see that post from someone who's username is (iLoveApple)!!
no that's OSX. Apple OSX.
Have any of you heard the term, "Don't feed the troll."?
There's plenty of interference at the 5.8GHz range from cordless phones. 2.4GHz cordless phones haven't been big sellers for 4 years. And wireless video systems almost always use 5.8GHz.
Also, 5.8GHz drops off MUCH more when there are intervening walls. I have a single base station for my house, and at 2.4GHz it covers the whole thing and then some. But there are a few places in the house where I get no coverage if I set the same base station (Apple Time Capsule) to 5.8GHz.
So there are ups and downs to each.
Personally, the biggest pain is that when the system is at 5.8GHz (like it is now), no one with a handheld device (iPhone/Touch/PSP) can access the network. I could go dual band like you, but I can't bring myself to run a 2nd base station full time since it wastes electricity.
I for one will wait till my crappy router dies till I think of spending that much to upgrade to n.
I agree on your point about the walls and drop-off with 5GHz. I have a AEBS (not dual-band, just gig ethernet) and a Linksys WRT54G. The AEBS is in 5GHz mode, and the Linksys is of course 2.4. With the Linksys I get coverage everything, even outside at the pool and all around the yard. With the Apple...not so much. I can hardly get a signal in the basement (Aluminum MacBook), so I end up using my Linksys everything except when I'm in my room (where the routers are located).
I don't agree with your electricity use concern... There's no way a simple Linksys (or any other 2.4GHz router) uses enough electric to make a difference.
Oh, are you using a base station that doesn't have a plug on it? Oh, it does, does it? Then I guess it's drawing power.
Every bit counts. I calculate the extra costs of another base station as about $15-25 per year. Maybe you don't care about that, but I do. By eliminating a lot of small things like this, you can save hundreds a year.
Either way, more power used is more power used, even if you think it's too small for you to care about.
Agreed. There a lot of things about this article that aren't very accurate. They talk about 5GHz as if it is the same as 802.11n, not even touching the fact that 802.11n also can use the 2.4GHz band or the existence of 802.11a. Even more annoying is that fact they don't even mention MIMO. They sort of just chalk everything up to "the higher band is less cluttered". The guy who wrote this clearly doesn't know much about wireless.
The range of the 5GHz band is terrible, i have an apple AEBS (gigabit, not dual band) and when i put it in 5ghz mode i get terrible reception, in the house through walls i get a terrible signal when longer than 15m away from the base station. thats through about 5 internal walls.
In 2.4ghz mode i get more than double the effective range. Where I live I am too far away from other houses for interference to be an issue apart (from the microwave) so 2.4ghz mode is the best for me. I dont transfer files over the network, just use it for internet and LAN gaming so breakneck speed isnt an issue
Why does anybody need stupidly high wireless speeds, it isn't like your internet is being capped by your current wireless speed...
because some people use their home network for things like streaming media from one PC to the other.
"all that RF interference slows everything down, making file transfers interminable and HD streaming nearly impossible."
This isn't about what's coming inside - it's about what's already there.
File transfers. Streaming from a server (real or faux) to Media Centers throughout the house.
Except that everybody outside the USA does have access to much faster speeds....
Here in the Netherlands the fastest (not very expensive, common used) internet subscription is cable (120 mbps), followed by fiberglass (100 mbps).
Crawl out of your hole my friend.
Bullox:
Firberglass != Optical Fiber (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiberglass, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_fiber).
You're right though. In the UK we have crappy internet service too - not quite as bad as the US, but i'm still insanely jealous of you guys on the continent.
everyone with 20mbps+ FiOS and an 802.11g router begs to differ with you.
Tommo, Ever heard of media center ? HD recordings ? try watching a HD recording on one of the extenders. It won't work over 802.11g.
The BEST way to go is still cat5 , run gigabit. Faster, and WAY more reliable. Plug in and forget. I ran 100 mbit at my last house over cat5 for 10 years and NEVER had a single issue with it.
I also run wireless for the laptops and can't say the same for that.
If you're using the 2-box setup, don't forget to disable DHCP on one of them.
If you don't disable DHCP on one of them the computers that pull an IP address from the router not connected to the WAN won't be able to get online because they won't have the right gateway IP. Make sure you disable the DHCP on the one that doesn't have a WAN connection.
What do you guys to show your speed next to the airport thing on the top of the screen?
MenuMeters -- can't live without it.
iStat Menus is far better
Your mom.....wait never mind.
I believe that is iStat Menus, which is awesome.
Now if the hard drive in my Macbook Pro wasn't failing (AGAIN... for different reasons than before... sigh) I'd run out and do something like this right away.
Why didn't I think of separate SSIDs? D'oh!
MenuMeters rules. Been using it for years, couldn't be without.
I have iStatPro and iPulse too but nothing beats MM for simplicity and usability.
Yes it's iStat Menus. Much better than Menu Meters and completely free.
In my experience wireless G with a boosted signal through DD-WRT works better than the same with N, but I'm guessing its because I'm going up through two floors.
Yeah, I boosted mine and my iPhone can see my router 4 houses up the strees. The problem is even though the iPhone can see the router, the router can't see the iPhone very well.
***DON'T*** increase that output power in dd-wrt/open-wrt or tomato !!!
I've got 2 buffalo routers and I has bumped up the power on both of them above the factory defaults. Things worked fine for about a year or two but I'm now running into link drop issues. Even if i ssh into the router and issue "wl ..." commands to play with the WiFi link, nothing helps.
It seems my little bump in output power reduced the IC life of the wifi chip in the router. Its a semiconductor so I'm not surprized that I've reduced the component life by stretching the limits. Again, if you're going to bump up the power, it's a good idea to refer to the chip datasheet to stay within the manufacturer's limits.
FYI, I didn't go crazy with the output power ... I boosted it by ~20% of the default value.
Thanks a lot, Nilay... I just bought a new router.
Stupid engadget always tempting me.
i'm having a hard time finding the option menus that they are showing... can anyone point me in the right direction??