Devolo

[Derek Broughton]

Eberhard Roloff wrote:

> Billie Erin Walsh wrote:
> 
>>> Again there is nothing like a network cable, indeed! It is very cheap,
>>> very fast and very secure. Just when ethernet cabling is no option and
>>> wireless is lousy, then these devices do a great job. In most cases,
>>> they are simply WAY better than wireless.
>>>   
>> 
>> Agreed as to cabling. However wifi connections don't need to be poor. If
>> properly done, and with proper equipment, it should be very successful.

But not more so than networking over the household wiring.  I just can't 
conceive of a way that a network _designed_ to be broadcast can be more 
secure than a hardware network using the same encryption methods.
> 
> Secondly more and more people that I work for, simply do not want to
> have wireless anymore. They do not want to expose their children and
> themselves to more radiation that they absolutely must. dLAN is a very
> welcome alternative here, since your mains doubtlessly are already there
> in your house and you will not alter their already existing irreducible
> radiation.

Run DC in the wires :-)
>> 
>> Personally, if I was setting up a wireless system as the OP mentioned I
>> would use a Linksys WRT router with dual antennas. Install the DD-WRT
>> firmware on the router. Remove one antenna and place it in a location
>> that isn't to obvious on the lower level. After that you can adjust the
>> power levels on the router and set it up to transmit and receive on both
>> antennas.
> 
> Sure you can try, but DD-WRT is not needed, although is is really great.
> The "Antenna-Diversity"-feature is common to any halfway modern routers
> with more than one antenna.

I don't get it - what's the value of removing an antenna?  In fact, they 
transmit _and_ receive on both antennas.  The antenna with the better signal 
gets used, which works beautifully on my router - configured as a WDS 
repeater, one antenna connected to a dish pointed at a router 1000' away, 
and the other using the original stubby.  The machines in my home 
communicate via the stubby, and the two routers communicate via the dish.
 
> Actually if wireless is what the OP wants to have, it might also make
> sense to use a much more focused antenna like this
> 0 Euros / 0 Dollars example:
> http://www.heise.de/netze/bilderstrecke/486/an0MTE2MzE5
> 
> But please note: Such an antenna does not work for draft-n connections
> and 5Ghz WLan will not get any benefit from it, either.
> 
> Hmmm, apparently I already was able to brush up my radio knowledge a
> little bit, at least as far as wireless LAN is concerned. ;-)))))))
> 
> Kind regards
> Eberhard
> 
> 

-- 
derek