On Fri 06 Apr 2018 at 16:26:47 (-0000), Dan Purgert wrote: > David Wright wrote: > > On Fri 06 Apr 2018 at 10:00:31 (-0000), Dan Purgert wrote: > >> Celejar wrote: > >> > On Tue, 3 Apr 2018 11:30:24 -0000 (UTC) > >> > Dan Purgert <d...@djph.net> wrote: > >> >> [...] > >> >> > >> >> Yep, you've got the terms right. > >> >> > >> >> Does the buffalo also provide wifi access to other clients close to it? > >> >> or is it JUST trying to pretend that it's a client device to the > >> >> TP-Link? > >> > > >> > I'm not using the Buffalo to provide wireless connectivity to any > >> > clients. The page I linked to does have instructions for doing that, > >> > but I don't need it. > >> > >> Good deal. Using the buffalo as a wifi repeater would kill throughput > >> for everything connected to it :) > > > > I was under the impression that this would work even with consumer > > grade routers if the backhaul was on a different band or, with dual > > radio routers, a different channel from the clients. > > > > It's a nuance in the semantics of what it means to "repeat" wifi. > Suffice to say, in order to "repeat" wifi, you have one radio splitting > its time between pretending to be an AP for a client device, and > pretending to be a client device to the upstream AP.
Then I'm not sure why you wrote "Good deal". I'd be wanting the wireless connectivity described above as not needed, though obviously on a separate band/channel. Were you implying that that would kill throughput for everything too? Cheers, David.
