Q: Mavericks, Airport, WiFi Stability, (Scan Test)
-
Oct 30, 2014 3:21 AMby LaPastenague,Mavericks has a wireless diagnostics that is quite helpful.. the utility part anyway.
I suggest that two computers might have entirely different connections and since you haven't spelled out the network but it is plainly more than one AP (you mention an AE and TC) then wireless speeds inside an extend wireless network can be all over the shop.
The more direct the connection and closer the connection the better.. but run through the wireless diagnostics and open the utility and check what is going on.
Expect loads of issues with double hop wireless.
-
Nov 3, 2014 2:18 PMby artnative,Thanks for the Tip.
The AE is connected next to the DSL-router. The TCs (located side by side) 10 meters away are connected over Wifi extending the network.
The 1st generation TC has a better connectivity than the 3rd generation TC. (Wow, that's a real progress in technical terms).
> Expect loads of issues with double hop wireless
I'm no WiFi expert, sorry ...
-
Nov 3, 2014 10:39 PMby LaPastenague,If the system is connected so that you have..
imac--wireless--TC1---wireless--TC2---wireless--scanner..
This is actually worse it is triple hop.. every packet goes through a cycle from unit to unit.. it does not link end to end.. it is like pass the parcel..
So it is best when there is only one wireless..
imac---wireless---TC1---ethernet--scanner.
That is one hop.
imac---wireless--TC1--wireless---scanner
That is two hops.. this will go at less than half the speed of the single hop.. and the triple hop will go at about 1/6 the speed if it makes it at all.
-
Nov 4, 2014 10:26 AMby artnative,I understand your point of view ... however I thought Airport devices were meant to create/extend a wireless network without cables.
> it is like pass the parcel..
It is, but even German Parcel Service is faster than this WiFi technology.
And if I change the room, the computer gets totally confused if it needs to connect automatically to another WiFi access point? Or if I relocate
the TC devices? I mean, this was Steve Jobs speech. Right?
" Hey really cool, I can put my TC wherever I want and easily backup my stuff.
Guys, really what's the problem?
Are TC backups secure if all the data and keychain files are stored on a TC device which resides as a share point to extend a WiFi network?
-
Nov 4, 2014 10:58 AMby Bob Timmons,I thought Airport devices were meant to create/extend a wireless network without cables.
Anyone who is as smart as you are will know that every technology involves compromises. There are upsides and downsides to every type of connection.
Upsides to wireless......it is cool, no wires. Downsides.....much slower than a wired connection, with a much greater chance of an error occurring over the connection.
Upsides to wired.....fastest speeds and the most reliable connections. Downsides....."not cool", you have to run the wire.
When you extend a wireless signal using wireless......you will lose about half of the potential speed on the network. There is no way to avoid this.
If you extend a wireless signal twice.....two "hops"....I think you know what will happen again. After the third "hop", the speed over wireless will be very, very slow.
The longer that it takes a backup to complete, the greater the chances that an error will occur.
These are the facts.
You will need to decide whether you want to choose performance or convenience on your network. It is your decision.
Ok then, we just drop another Apple Technology named "Extend a wireless network" in all future TC and all future Airport devices. Yes or No?
Apple wants to be "cool", so I doubt that they would choose "not cool". If they did choose to remove the "extend a wireless network feature" though, we would not be nearly so busy on these forums trying to help users who are having problems.
As far as "security"......that is an illusion on the Time Capsule.
Anyone who presses the reset button on the Time Capsule for one second now has five minutes of free access to make any changes that they want on your Time Capsule, including changing the passwords, so they will able to access the data on the hard drive if they want.
Hopefully, you will read the last sentence soon, because the Apple forum moderators will very likely delete it, since Apple does not want you to know about this.
-
Nov 4, 2014 11:09 AMby artnative,It is not a question if something is "cool" or not "cool". It's a management question. A product manager asks a developer team. Can you do it, yes or no, and then the product manager takes a decision whether to include that feature or not before it turns out that the feature is more "uncool" than "cool".
-
Nov 4, 2014 11:18 AMby Bob Timmons,It is not a question if something is "cool" or not "cool"
Of course it is.
If Apple decided to limit wireless features on their products in the future, what do you think will happen to the sales of those products?
Apple does not care that wireless is not as good as wired, as long as the sales keep going up.
Look at the new laptops......Apple removed the Ethernet ports.
-
Nov 4, 2014 11:28 AMby Loner T,artnative wrote:
The problem with your "new airport utility" is further that I no longer know, which computer
is connected over WiFi to which Airport Extreme or TimeCapsule device.
On the Mac, if you hold Alt+Click on the WiFi icon in the Menu bar, it will show you the BSSID to which it is connected.
-
Nov 5, 2014 1:34 AMby artnative,> If you extend a wireless signal twice.....two "hops"....I think you know what will happen again. After the third "hop", the speed over wireless will be very, very slow.
That said, therefore if I access the Apple website www.apple.com hosted in the US from the EU, the website www.apple.com with so many many many multiple DNS hops (for every single file) should be terribly terribly slow then.
-
Nov 5, 2014 3:26 AMby Loner T,artnative wrote:
> If you extend a wireless signal twice.....two "hops"....I think you know what will happen again. After the third "hop", the speed over wireless will be very, very slow.
That said, therefore if I access the Apple website www.apple.com hosted in the US from the EU, the website www.apple.com with so many many many multiple DNS hops (for every single file) should be terribly terribly slow then.
Instead of speculating, use Wireshark and see what happens.
-
Nov 5, 2014 3:19 PMby Loner T,Perhaps they do, but your statement about DNS and multiple hops makes no sense. DNS is a publish-and-subscribe mechanism, with TTLs and caches. Even a one-time 300+ millisecond DNS lookup for the initial http connection is very reasonable.
For example...
dig www.bbc.co.uk
; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> www.bbc.co.uk
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 42339
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 3, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.bbc.co.uk. IN A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.bbc.co.uk. 300 IN CNAME www.bbc.net.uk.
www.bbc.net.uk. 300 IN A 212.58.246.92
www.bbc.net.uk. 300 IN A 212.58.246.93
;; Query time: 199 msec
;; SERVER: 10.71.30.30#53(10.71.30.30)
;; WHEN: Wed Nov 5 18:13:44 2014
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 89
dig tennis.eu
; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> tennis.eu
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 52923
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;tennis.eu. IN A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
tennis.eu. 10800 IN A 81.93.60.18
;; Query time: 342 msec
;; SERVER: 10.71.30.30#53(10.71.30.30)
;; WHEN: Wed Nov 5 18:14:42 2014
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 43
dig www.google.com
; <<>> DiG 9.8.3-P1 <<>> www.google.com
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 32534
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 6, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;www.google.com. IN A
;; ANSWER SECTION:
www.google.com. 114 IN A 74.125.69.104
www.google.com. 114 IN A 74.125.69.103
www.google.com. 114 IN A 74.125.69.105
www.google.com. 114 IN A 74.125.69.106
www.google.com. 114 IN A 74.125.69.147
www.google.com. 114 IN A 74.125.69.99
;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 10.71.30.30#53(10.71.30.30)
;; WHEN: Wed Nov 5 18:15:57 2014
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 128
