XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-10   
   From: nospam@nospam.invalid   
      
   In article , DanS   
    wrote:   
      
      
   >   
   > The other thing, if that old router/AP, IS concurrent dual band, you may be   
   > able to   
   > connect the WLAN devices on 2.4, and 'backhaul' it to the main AP at 5.8 or   
   > visa-   
   > versa. That way, no speed is 'cut in half' receiving and then retransmitting   
   > on the same   
   > AP. Any speed loss that way, is based on the quality and max connection speed   
   > of 2.4   
   > & 5.8G connections to said repeater, not because it gets cut in half trying   
   > to   
   > rebroadcast on the same 2.4 or 5.8Ghz AP.   
      
   true but in that scenario, you'd be limited to 2.4gz speeds, which are   
   *slow*.   
      
   a better option is a tri-band unit, which uses a second 5ghz band for   
   the backhaul. there are also quad-band routers.   
      
   an even better option (in most cases) is a wired backhaul, however,   
   wired isn't always an option, and for wifi 6 (and later), wired gigabit   
   will be a bottleneck.   
      
   > But, WIRED IS ALWAYS BETTER for reliability and speeds.   
      
   not always. that depends on the wire and wireless.   
      
   wifi 6 is *faster* than gigabit wired ethernet, but not as fast as   
   2.5/5/10gb-e wired, which although not common (yet), is starting to   
   become more prevalent.   
      
      
   most people have gigabit, making it the limiting factor, which is why   
   many wifi 6 routers have at least one 2.5gb port, some 10gb-e.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)