Catfisch Cinema Home Wifi Upgrade (1 Viewer)

[DaveF]

That's more or less true but I leave it disabled for a couple of reasons.

• IPv6 adds no practical performance increase at this point but enabling any additional protocol does add some degree of extra processing for the network stack. It's likely negligible so no harm done on that front.
• The larger concern for me is IPv6 eliminates NAT'ing, which affords a layer of security for most home networks. I'd be interested in @Dave Upton 's thought on this one but since there's no real reason to enable the protocol I have chosen not to for the time being at least.

I don't anything about this, but this is like the third search result on "IPv6 for home network". But if it provides no value, it's a toggle switch to turn it back off. I think I had it on the past several years as well with my Apple hardware.

Should I Use Ipv6 On My Home Network - Livelaptopspec

IPv6 is very important for the long-term health of the Internet. There are only about 3.7 billion public IPv4 addresses. So, if you work at an Internet service provider, manage

www.sovereignvalley.com

Does enabling IPv6 speed up Internet?​

Windows, Linux, and other operating systems all have built-in support for IPv6, and it’s enabled by default. According to a myth going around, this IPv6 support is slowing down your connection and disabling it will speed things up.

 

[Dennis Nicholls]

My "emergency backup" Android phone, which I never have really learned to use, has now been checked on the 2.4GHz band with the AX55. The TCL works really well at 5GHz. So the only issue remaining is that my old laptop doesn't see the Wifi from the AX55 on either channel, although it does see all my neighbors' routers.

For nostalgic reasons I use my grandparents' Ham radio call sign W6LXA in my SSIDs. They would be pleased to know that W6LXA is still on the air so to speak.

I don't use the Tether app since I never sat down to learn the Android phone.

EDIT I found a helpful note in the FAQ for the AX55. https://www.tp-link.com/us/support/faq/2303/ Intel discovered that older drivers for their wifi modules can't hack 802.11ax signals so they have posted updated drivers that do support it. I had installed an Intel 7260 module into my old laptop to give it AC Wifi capability, and it was on an older driver. I need to drag it into my office and connect it with a cable so I can download the new driver.

The Intel support page is at https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...-fi-drivers-for-intel-wireless-adapters.html? Intel wifi modules were used all over in laptops, e.g. Dell, so this information may help others.

2nd EDIT Updating the driver for the Intel 7260AC module to version 18.33.17.1 did the trick. The old laptop now talks wifi with the router.

 

[JohnRice]

BTW, this gave me the opportunity to watch the actual data needs for streaming. I was watching Carlito's Way in 4K HDR and realized that the stream isn't steady. It's stagnant most of the time, then takes bursts of data at up to 300Mb/s in this case. That might explain why a 100Mb/s (for example) data plan that should be sufficient might not actually be sufficient for a smooth stream.

Also, this model does allow you to schedule reboots. I've never done that regularly, but figured I'd schedule it weekly.

 

[DaveF]

BTW, this gave me the opportunity to watch the actual data needs for streaming. I was watching Carlito's Way in 4K HDR and realized that the stream isn't steady. It's stagnant most of the time, then takes bursts of data at up to 300Mb/s in this case. That might explain why a 100Mb/s (for example) data plan that should be sufficient might not actually be sufficient for a smooth stream.

Also, this model does allow you to schedule reboots. I've never done that regularly, but figured I'd schedule it weekly.

Cool. I definitely bought a more budget entry system. Which is fine. I wasn’t really thinking about WPA3 or other fancy features when I decided to not go high-end Access Point approach.

I haven’t watched to see real-time data usage during streaming. I’ll try that sometime.

 

[JohnRice]

Cool. I definitely bought a more budget entry system. Which is fine. I wasn’t really thinking about WPA3 or other fancy features when I decided to not go high-end Access Point approach.

What I suspect is the best approach for most regular people is to start with a powerful router like this and locate it centrally. Then, if you have spots or outdoor areas you want to add better coverage to, you add an AP (or more than one) where needed. For people with the starter mansions I used to photograph, you can get more of these powerful routers and run them as wired APs.

 

[DaveF]

What I suspect is the best approach for most regular people is to start with a powerful router like this and locate it centrally. Then, if you have spots or outdoor areas you want to add better coverage to, you add an AP (or more than one) where needed. For people with the starter mansions I used to photograph, you can get more of these powerful routers and run them as wired APs.

That’s what I would do if I could. I just don’t have an easy way to centrally locate a main wifi router.

 

[JohnRice]

I'm glad @Dennis Nicholls spurred me to give this unit another chance. It's working fine, and now I know to do firmware updates only from the web browser.

I like to have the same stuff at home and work, so I figured I'd replace the even older AirPort at work, even though our wireless needs there are minimal. This one allows me to schedule shutting the WiFi off/on, and it just seems like a smart thing to have the wireless shut down after work every day and all weekend.

 

[Dave Upton]

That's more or less true but I leave it disabled for a couple of reasons.

• IPv6 adds no practical performance increase at this point but enabling any additional protocol does add some degree of extra processing for the network stack. It's likely negligible so no harm done on that front.
• The larger concern for me is IPv6 eliminates NAT'ing, which affords a layer of security for most home networks. I'd be interested in @Dave Upton 's thought on this one but since there's no real reason to enable the protocol I have chosen not to for the time being at least.

As I understand it, most consumer routers don't really stop NATing when you enable IPv6 because it's mostly for the LAN. They just use 6to4 or Teredo normally.

If your ISP supports v6, and issues you a v6 address space, and your router supports IPv6, then you could find yourself without NAT. However in these cases, i'm not sure if the router would even do that without a stateful firewall module - otherwise you're not securing the home network.

 

[DaveF]

I turned it back off, since there seemed to be no practical benefit to me.

I wonder if I’d turned it on previous to expose my Emby HTPC secret to the outside world? I haven’t revisited that since charging WiFi hardware. And I don’t actually watch my HTPC content posted the home like I originally thought I would.

 

[JohnRice]

Here's a general question.

The new router has 5GHz and the old one was so old, I'm not certain it did. The range of 5G is so short though that my iPhone and iPad will connect to it when I'm in that part of the house, but then I'll go to the bedroom and they are very hesitant to switch to 2.4GHz, even though that will provide speed that's almost 10x what 5GHz will. I've seen it drop to 30Mb/s and not change to 2.4 which will give me 250-300. So, I'm wondering if I even need 5GHz activated at all. My internet service is 600Mb/s and 2.4 can nearly provide that, but is much better at longer distances.

 

[John Dirk]

Here's a general question.

The new router has 5GHz and the old one was so old, I'm not certain it did. The range of 5G is so short though that my iPhone and iPad will connect to it when I'm in that part of the house, but then I'll go to the bedroom and they are very hesitant to switch to 2.4GHz, even though that will provide speed that's almost 10x what 5GHz will. I've seen it drop to 30Mb/s and not change to 2.4 which will give me 250-300. So, I'm wondering if I even need 5GHz activated at all. My internet service is 600Mb/s and 2.4 can nearly provide that, but is much better at longer distances.

Your use case is pretty straightforward so you might indeed be better off just disabling the 5Ghz network. I use mine mainly in the master bedroom where I have a proximal AP.

For people with the starter mansions I used to photograph, you can get more of these powerful routers and run them as wired APs.

No need for powerful routers if they're going to be used as AP's. I have 4 distributed AP's throughout my home and the most expensive of them cost me about $80.00. All they really need is a decent radio and a Gigabit wired uplink.

 

[JohnRice]

After experimenting and observing over time, what I've learned is that in the bedroom side of the house, sometimes I get 300Mb and sometimes I get 20Mb. So, I'm going to go ahead and install an AP in the office in the basement of that end of the house.

 

[John Dirk]

After experimenting and observing over time, what I've learned is that in the bedroom side of the house, sometimes I get 300Mb and sometimes I get 20Mb. So, I'm going to go ahead and install an AP in the office in the basement of that end of the house.

No way to install the AP in the bedroom?

 

[JohnRice]

No way to install the AP in the bedroom?

The office I'll install it in is directly below the bedroom, so the AP will be one surface (the floor) and about 6' from the clients. I could run ethernet through into that room, but this should be plenty good. I always have the option of going ahead and doing that in the future.

 

[John Dirk]

The office I'll install it in is directly below the bedroom, so the AP will be one surface (the floor) and about 6' from the clients. I could run ethernet through into that room, but this should be plenty good. I always have the option of going ahead and doing that in the future.

Run the Ethernet. We'll respect you more.

 

[JohnRice]

Run the Ethernet. We'll respect you more.

That is the geekiest peer pressure in history.

 

[JohnRice]

I ended up going with a stronger AP using a TP-Link AX10 and I have a few questions for you guys, especially John D and Dave U, regarding the benefits of different configurations.

My mobile devices are hesitant to switch to the AP, even when I'm in the same room as it. Is there anything to do in order to encourage them to switch? If I restart them, they will switch to the closer AP when I'm in that part of the house, but they don't seem to want to di it on their own, even though the connection can be a lot faster.

I have the AP set using the same network name and password as the other one. Should I hide the SSID in the configuration of the AP? I'm wondering about using a different network name on the AP, so if I want to, I can just make mobile devices switch manually. Then I'd just configure any devices in that part of the house to connect to the AP only.

EDIT: weird that as I move my two mobile devices (iPhone & iPad) around the house now they switch pretty quickly. That seemed to improve once I restarted them after setting up the AP. Prior to that, they just didn't switch.

 

[DaveF]

I ended up going with a stronger AP using a TP-Link AX10 and I have a few questions for you guys, especially John D and Dave U, regarding the benefits of different configurations.

My mobile devices are hesitant to switch to the AP, even when I'm in the same room as it. Is there anything to do in order to encourage them to switch? If I restart them, they will switch to the closer AP when I'm in that part of the house, but they don't seem to want to di it on their own, even though the connection can be a lot faster.

I have the AP set using the same network name and password as the other one. Should I hide the SSID in the configuration of the AP? I'm wondering about using a different network name on the AP, so if I want to, I can just make mobile devices switch manually. Then I'd just configure any devices in that part of the house to connect to the AP only.

EDIT: weird that as I move my two mobile devices (iPhone & iPad) around the house now they switch pretty quickly. That seemed to improve once I restarted them after setting up the AP. Prior to that, they just didn't switch.

1) Toggle wifi off and on, on a recalcitrant device to get it to connect to the nearest wifi source.

2) Check if your router or beacon have a “Fast Roaming” option and turn it on.

3) A unique network for each room is just crazy talk ! And you’ll still be manually changing networks constantly so just use 1) and 2) above.

 

[John Dirk]

I'm wondering about using a different network name on the AP, so if I want to, I can just make mobile devices switch manually. Then I'd just configure any devices in that part of the house to connect to the AP only.

3) A unique network for each room is just crazy talk ! And you’ll still be manually changing networks constantly so just use 1) and 2) above.

That's pretty much what I do. I also assign distinctive SSID's for my 2G and 5G networks for the same reason. My OCD mandates that I know which AP a mobile device is connected to at any time. Crazy? Possibly. This would be only one more in a long list of examples of that for me.

 

[DaveF]

Whatever you think helps!