Wi-Fi Adaptor query

[#1]

Thinking ahead to the future installation of fibre, and the then location of my router, as my PC does not have inbuilt Wi-Fi I recently purchased a TP-Link Archer AC1300 Mini Wireless USB3 Adaptor.

It is described as having speeds of "867 Mbps on 5 GHz and 400 Mbps on 2.4 GHz" with the qualifer:

"Maximum wireless signal rates are the physical rates derived from IEEE Standard 802.11 specifications. Actual wireless data throughput and wireless coverage, and quantity of connected devices are not guaranteed and will vary as a result of network conditions, AP limitations, and environmental factors, including building materias, obstacles, volume and density of traffic, and AP location."

So I plugged it into a USB3 port on the back of my PC, set up drivers with no problems. Switched on 2.5 GHz Wi-Fi in my Plusnet Hub 2 router - about four feet from the PC - and tried it out!

I was a little disappointed to find it could only manage a maximum of 173.5 Mbps, with occasional dips in speed below this. Less that half the claimed 400 Mbps maximum. Although, in practice, this wasn't really a limitation for my simple requirements.

I then switched off 2.5 GHz Wi-Fi on the Hub 2 and switched on 5 GHz to try it out, expecting to be similarly 'disappointed' by the mini USB wireless adaptor.

To my surprise this time the registered speed of the device was a very stable 867 Mpbs, the maximum given in its specifications for 5 GHz operation.

Why the difference? Local network congestion on 2.5 Ghz? The very small internal aerial in the mini USB adaptor is more effective at the shorter 5 GHz wavelength? The rear USB port is directly adjacent to the video connector - could there be interference on 2.5 GHz, or the video lead itself 'interfering' with the longer wavelength 2.5 GHz transmission? (Have yet to try out the adaptor plugged into the front of the PC)

[#2]

@pvmb 

Two questions. You speak of "thinking ahead to the future installion of fibre"  yet ti appears you already have FTTP - is this correct?

If the PC is only 4 feet from the router have you tried an ethenet cable?

Brian

[#3]

...I think you are missing the point!

No, I don't have FTTP. That is what I am thinking ahead to.

Currently, on FTTC, the PC is four feet from the router because the router is plugged into the adjacent landline extension socket in the middle of the room and into the PC by a short Ethernet cable. Come FTTP, it won't be.  🙂

[#4]

@pvmb Leave the router where it is and connect it by ethernet to the FTTP ONT wherever that might be. It doesn't have to be in the same place as the landline master socket.

[#5]

...I know that.

But that requires installing an Ethernet cable all around a room, through a door - IF ONT is installed where it MIGHT be installed (or not!). Wi-Fi is a lot easier and neater than that.

Then again... I am already cooking up another possible plot. Perhaps(???) I can convert the existing underfloor wired telephone extension link into an Ethernet link? IF -

1. I can pull the telephone extension cable though and use it to somehow pull an Ethernet cable through after it.

2. I can persuade the OR engineer to let me use the existing master socket outlet for an Ethernet socket and he installs the ONT to one side of the existing OP master socket rather than over the existing master socket outlet.

3. The ONT IS installed alongside the existing master socket and not somewhere entirely different

😃

[#6]

@pvmb 

I didn't "miss the point" -  I asked questions to clarify your set up.

There is a certain amout of leeway when it comes to the location of the ONT - it doesn't have to be in the same place as the Master Socket. As such, you might be able to get it in a better location to enable you to run ethernet cable without too much disruption. Unfortunately you never know for sure until the day of install.

Brian

[#7]

The ONT in the same site as the existing master socket IS my preferred location (despite no power supply at present). To my mind it is the shortest and most convenient route for the OR fibre install. But that is just my opinion, I won't know until the day. That is why I am trying to think ahead. 

Anyway, back to that USB Wi-Fi adaptor...

[#8]

@pvmb 

1) If you installed the copper extension then I see no reason why you can't use the existing cable to pull through an ethernet cable. Ethernet wall sockets are far easier the wire up then ethernet plugs - you just need a punch down tool. If the extension was done when the property was built it might be a different matter.

3) Your Master Socket location is usually the default location for the ONT so long as there's power available.

2) If you wish to use the existing MS box for the ethernet wall plug the installer might need to drill a new hole for the fibre cable. Would it be possible / easier to simply install a new wall socket for the ethernet? With this however, you'd need the hole in place at the time of the ONT install as you'd want to get the extension wires to the new location - I am thinking the two sockets would only be a few inches apart.

Brian

[#9]

@pvmb 5ghz wifi with a decent signal should give around 400Mb 'real world' using a Wifi 5 capable router (like the Hub 2).

For example, I'm sat around 10ft from my router, 5ghz gives me a speedtest of 450Mb , 2.4ghz by comparison maxes out at 100Mb. In this situation my laptop shows a link speed of 866Mb.

So if you can get a link speed of 867Mb in the desired location, then unless you plan on going for the 900Mb FTTP , wifi will not limit your connection to any great extent.

[#10]

1) The landline extension was built into the property when originally built. Hence I have no idea at present whether it can be pulled through or not. More experimentation needed!

2) I didn't know the current master socket was the default location for the ONT (though it would seem to make sense to me) as it is usually described as being installed by drilling though a front wall of the property.

3) "Would it be possible / easier to simply install a new wall socket for the ethernet?" I was hoping the OR engineer could do all the hard work...

[#11]

@pvmb You may not know that old-school telephone cable can be used as Ethernet cable, in fact I've been doing that for a long time in my house and it works perfectly well.

Important points:

If, as is likely, it's 4-core phone cable that's fine. The "newer" type that has blue/white and orange/white cores is actually twisted pair (I think technically Cat3) and fine for up to 100mbps connections over domestic distances, even up to 100 metres. The older solid-colour type is probably not to the same spec but will very likely work anyway.

You need to wire it to the correct 4 contacts on the RJ45 plugs, that's easily found online.

Gigabit speeds need all 8 wires, so forget that if using phone cables.

[#12]

Thanks for that, HPsauce. I had wondered about this myself but wasn't sure and then saw that Cat 5/6 Ethernet cable used eight wires and thought "probably not".

Mind you, the existing cable is about 40 years old...

[#13]

@pvmb 

The FTTP installer is only responsible for getting the ONT into your property and ensuring it's working before they leave. Anything after that is your responsibility.

The MS location is the default for the ONT purely because the fibre cable will follow the route of the existing copper. With older houses where the MS may not be in a good location for access eg amoured copper wire was run under the house with no ducting in place then they'll look at alternatives.

That aside they should speak to the property owner before they start work to confirm what they're doing, especially if the location needs changing. Whether or not the MS is accessible, this is the chance for the property owner to say I'd like the ONT here please. If possible, they tend to work with you.

Are you currently fed by overhead or underground cable?

Brian

[#14]

@bmc 

Currently underground by armoured cable. However, the distance from the master socket to an external BT/OR duct is very short - no more than about 10 feet, AFAICS.

[#15]

@pvmb The phone cable switch from solid colours to blue/orange/white twisted pair cable was around 1980, so 44 years ago!

Cat6 definitely uses all 8 cores, Cat 5 I think can be 4 or 8 depending on speed required, Cat5e replaced Cat5 long ago (2001!). If you look at a lot of ethernet cables supplied with older routers many are only wired 4-core. The yellow cables supplied with Netgear routers were typically that type, saves a tiny bit of cost!