Setting up a mixed g and n network on 1st Extreme + newer Express?

Question

Level 1

119 points

Setting up a mixed g and n network on 1st Extreme + newer Express?

I have a first gen Airport Extreme 802.11n (flat white, first one they made before adding on gigabyte ethernet). It is great for my needs. It goes into a cable modem. The Extreme handles all routing and the rest. The modem is just a modem that, BTW, Comcast forces me to rent because I use their phone service and customers cannot buy a separate “Voip” specific to Comcast for use with a cable modem they already own. So a perfectly good Moto DOCIS 3.x modem I own sits idle…)

Anyhow…

I had a first gen Airport Express (very limited in capability). It died. So I got a new Airport Express 802.11n (flat white) about a year ago. I hooked that up mostly to use on a printer and for travel. I made it part of my main network. It “extends” it but, my house/property is very small. A large Wi-Fi network is not needed but, seemed only option to be on network and print.

Recently, I added yet another device to my Wi-Fi network. A small router for an AV receiver. It was, alas, 802.11g. I also have two other g devices and maybe a third and fourth (I’ll have to check, both I rarely use. One is unplugged as I rarely use it and the other is hooked up to an internet TV that is rarely used).

All of these devices worked great until I turn on my old Mac Mini, which I think is also 802.11g. Before that AV receiver router was added, it was fine. But now, Wi-Fi on it is basically gone. Except, when it isn’t!

For some reason, my network has decided that the Mini should connect via the Express. Since other g’s are on that, I think that is the problem. I don’t see how it happens but, sometimes, it connects with the older Extreme. When that happens, it seems to work great! Note, I did try using just he Express in place of the Extreme hooked up to the cable modem for the entire network but, it could not handle it. The Extreme can.

Since both the Extreme and Express are similar as 802.11n Wi-Fi routers except, the Express says something like revision 1 when I look at it on iOS Airport Utility (is it “better” in some way?) I think the solution is telling the Extreme and Express to only accept certain devices.

How can I tell each router to accept only certain devices? The old Extreme has one way (it seems) of doing this while the Express has another. But neither is precisely what I think I need to do. The settings for this are under the Wireless Options button under the Wireless tab in Airport Utility (latest, OSX). But if you can answer this question with any knowledge, you know that!

I’d just buy a new Extreme which, I think, allows radio signal frequency segregation (or whatever this is called) but, alas, these two Wi-Fi routers work great (except for the Mini) and I’d like to use them until one actually dies.

iMac (27-inch Late 2009), OS X Mavericks (10.9)

Posted on Apr 28, 2015 8:29 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Best reply

LaPastenague

Level 9

67,202 points

May 2, 2015 1:38 PM in response to Ataraxy01

If both are plugged in by ethernet.. you can setup wireless on each with a different name..

Do not extend wireless.. that is the problem.. the old AE is not dual band simultaneous.. so it can do either 2.4ghz or 5ghz.. the new Express can do dual band..

So plug the new express into the Extreme.. and run it in create a wireless network.. it can provide wireless for the whole network.. except old mini.

Setup the extreme with a different wireless name.. and have the mini just join that.. remove all the old wireless setups so it cannot see the express wireless at all.

Reply

Answer 2

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 1, 2015 11:03 AM in response to LaPastenague

Thanks. I would do all of this but, the Extreme is some distance and a floor down from the Express. I use the Express to print wirelessly.
Also, the Extreme seems capable of handling all the others. When I used just the Express recently, it never had all the bars or speed of the older Extreme.
Keep in mind, usually, only one device at a time is being used too. I am guessing dual band simultaneous would be important if more than one device was being used. But, that is not the case. Although, some are “on” but in sleep mode.

To throw in another note on this: I did not have this problem at all until I updated Firefox or; TunnelBear (rarely use) on the Mac Mini (Snow Leopard - last stable OS that runs on it). I suspect the culprit is TunnelBear and it broke something in the network settings as it was never really Snow Leopard capable.

Reply

Answer 3

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 1, 2015 11:09 AM in response to LaPastenague

Oh, I think another thing that might be happening is that one of the G devices was bothering the Express all the time and since the Extreme is not dual, it was dedicating itself to the Express at the expense of the MacMini.

But thinking that way, why can’t I set the radio mode from the Extreme to always communicate with the Express on one band. .11n at 5GHz? Then, leaving the Express with the printer, utilizing its simultaneous dual band capabilities?
Kind of a version of your wired option.

Reply

Answer 4

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 1, 2015 11:24 AM in response to Ataraxy01

I just tried it and it seems to work. The g devices are linking only to the Express. All the n devices are linking to the Extreme via n set at 5GHz radio mode. Fastest is iMac at 180Mbs.
I assume the “dotted line” extended network mode the Express is in, presumably links to the Extreme *only* at 5GHz.
So data hits the Express at g speeds from g devices but is sent network mode to the Extreme at n speed - since that is all the Extreme will take or give now.

Reply

Answer 5

May 1, 2015 12:20 PM in response to Ataraxy01

So data hits the Express at g speeds from g devices but is sent network mode to the Extreme at n speed - since that is all the Extreme will take or give now.

Not quite.

A signal can slow down on a network, but it cannot ever speed up.

The "g" speed connections will be a maximum of 54 Mbps. If that connects to an "n" signal, the speed will still transmit at "g" speeds of 54 Mbps maximum, even though it might be over an "n" capable connection of up to 130 Mbps.

Reply

Answer 6

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 2, 2015 7:54 AM in response to Bob Timmons

Where have you proof of this? Would like to see it.
Remember, I have limited the old Extreme under Wireless Options to a Radio Mode of "802.11n only (5GHz)"

If what you are saying is true, then this setting is meaningless and false. The Express is set to Bridge mode on the network. It would only be via this single network connection that the n speed would happen.

If you are saying that an n restricted Airport transmits between Airports at g speed in this bridge scenario, I would like to see proof.
Extreme settings:

Reply

Answer 7

May 2, 2015 8:14 AM in response to Ataraxy01

A "b" signal of 11 Mbps cannot accelerate itself to "g" speeds. The signal will never be any faster than 11 Mbps no matter where it goes.

A "g" signal of 54 Mbps cannot accelerate itself to "n" speeds. The signal will never be any faster than 54 Mbps no matter where it goes.

Imagine your "n" network as a firehose that is capable of moving water through the hose. Call that your "n" network speed. Now imagine that your "g" network is a garden hose. Call that your "g" network speed.

With the right adapter, you can connect the garden hose to the fire hose. But, no matter what you do, you will not get any more water out of the firehose than the garden hose can deliver.

It that analogy is not clear to you, then no amount of proof will convince you otherwise.

The Express might be capable of communicating with another device on the network at "n" 5 GHz speeds. But, if the Express receives a "g" signal from a wireless device, it passes the signal from that device on at "g" speeds. That signal will never speed up, because it can't.

However, since the signal is being transmitted over wireless and speeds slow down with the distance the signal must travel, the "g" signal will likely slow down from 54 Mpbs to a lower value. How much is slows from 54 Mbps is a function of how far it must travel and whether it encounters wireless interference in the process.

Reply

Answer 8

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 2, 2015 9:08 AM in response to Bob Timmons

You are assuming the Express passes a radio signal on. But, if the Express receives a signal via g, does it:

A: Do as you say, simply retransmit (with the n only Extreme taking it in slower somehow) or

B: The Express routes the signal *data* (not the radio signal) then transmits it again, on that one network bridge connection, a n signal to the n only Extreme. This makes more sense to me and is more modern.

Keeping in mind that the Express is Dual band simultaneous 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz but the older Extreme is just Dual band 2.4 GHz or 5 GHz. Not that it matters as I have set the Extreme to 5GHz only.
However, I am still waiting for some proof, other than you replying here, as to your version. White paper? Apple tech page? Something?

Reply

Answer 9

May 2, 2015 9:37 AM in response to Ataraxy01

If you think that you can connect a garden hose to a fire hose and somehow get more water out of the firehose than the garden hose can deliver, then as I said, no amount of proof will convince you otherwise.

I have already wasted too much time trying to explain this to you, so I suggest that you continue under the illusion that a slower signal can magically be made to go faster. You will be happier if continue to believe this.

Reply

Answer 10

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 2, 2015 10:41 AM in response to Bob Timmons

You still refuse to discuss data versus radio signal.

So, I guess that is that. You have no proof to back up your contention as neither do I.

Granted, from the g device to my Express, it is at g speeds. But, I contend, that once that g radio signal is converted back to data only (now at speed of light) inside the Express, the Express sends that data, via the exclusive “Extended network” connection, to the Extreme, at n speed. It has to as the Extreme will only take n speed.

Sure, it is splitting hairs, if I am right. I am not saying I am. But my idea (before our branch debate on g and n signal versus data upon arrival at the Express) is an interesting way to force old g clients to use only one router. But to force those pesky g clients to use the newer simultaneous dual band Express by setting the Extreme to 5GHz g only was a new solution for me. It worked too. In that case, it is not about minute speed gains or losses but simply letting the g clients have their one party at the Express, which can handle them better when part of an extended network with an older, original Extreme.

It is also far better to just have one Wi-Fi router as, adding Airport routers in an extended network, slows things down 60% or less and requires more "data management overheard", according to Apple*.

It is interesting that they said data management overhead and not radio signal management?

Alternatively, using the “Roaming network” method where the two stations are linked via Ethernet, is an even better option.

* https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT202056

Reply

Answer 11

May 2, 2015 11:15 AM in response to Ataraxy01

But, I contend, that once that g radio signal is converted back to data only (now at speed of light) inside the Express, the Express sends that data, via the exclusive “Extended network” connection, to the Extreme, at n speed. It has to as the Extreme will only take n speed.

You do understand that the "g" signal of 54 Mbps.....even if it is converted to "n" capability.....will remain at the original "g" speed at which it connected..... 54 Mbps, correct?

So, your remote device, connecting at 54 Mbps....let's call it 54 gallons per minute to make this easier for you.....might connect to a larger hose that has the capability to move water through at a greater rate.....say 130 gallons per minute.

If you only have 54 gallons per minute capability with the "g" hose and you connect that "g" hose to a faster 130 gallons per minute capable "n" hose......

How much water will be moving through the hose that is capable of handling 130 gallons per minute, but it is only being fed an amount of 54 gallons per minute?

There is no point in trying to offer more data unless you can accept this principle.

If you really do feel that once a 54 gallons per minute hose connects to another 130 gallon per minute capable hose that the 54 gallon per minute hose will suddenly and magically be able to deliver more than 54 gallons per minute.......I would like to see that 54 gallon per minute hose.

It is time for LaPastenague to try to explain this in a different way to you.....one that you might understand, since I have failed to do this.

Reply

Answer 12

Ataraxy01 Author

Level 1

119 points

May 2, 2015 1:37 PM in response to Bob Timmons

I have always understood your fire and garden hose analogy. However, it is a poor analogy. Water is not data and data is not water. Data is carried by radio waves based on standards. Once that data leaves that 802.11 standard, and is inside the device on an integrated circuit, it is no longer part of a radio wave but is back to bits of data. Those bits are in turn converted back to the 802.11 standard which, in describing my set up change, is now n and transmitted to the Extreme. An Extreme that is only 802.11n.

If you believe what you are saying, then data remains in a radio wave 802.11g form of some kind while it passes though the Express. This would be an analog pass through, as radio waves are analog as is the data on them.

But I think, just like all digital data, a DAC, of sorts, in the Express converts the analog back to digital so the digital routing mechanism in the Express can route it and then send out on an antenna in analog form again. That very fast process means that – while the g data is coming in analog and converted, the quickly converted, routed, converted back to analog data is heading to the Extreme at n speeds. However, it may not be n volume.

I am ending it there. You obviously are just pulling this out of your rear end. Me, I admit, I could be wrong but, until I see some reputable source on the matter, remain neutral.

Ultimately, it does not matter. The difference between either scenario is so small, who cares! Also, that 60% or worse degradation and the data overhead, due to this being an Extended network, makes this discussion pointless.

Reply