Jeff Liebermann wrote:


My home system is "1540 Jackson Ave" which is my address. The
assumption is that someone wanting to use my system can bang on the
door and ask permission. My office SSID uses the company name.
...

Yes, well, my time is too valuable to me ... this is the territory of
control freaks and game players. I am working to provide free, high
speed, internet to all ... yes, I envision homeless people with laptops
on the internet, OF COURSE!


I'll stand by my statement. Unless you're running a mesh network, an
omni at the client end is a bad idea. The client knows the direction
of the desired access point and should use a directional antenna to
minimize interference. In my limited experience (I ran a small WISP
and neighborhood LAN/WLAN for a few years) interference is the most
serious impediment to reliable operation. The more you can do to NOT
hear the undesired stations, the more reliable the connection.


Standby and wait for the world to begin ... you won't be alone.


Sorta. You can do route switching easily enough, but load balancing
between multiple internet connections can't be done without IP
bonding, which requires everyone's cooperation (including the ISP's).
The problem is that you can't use multiple ISP's to improve the
download speed from a single connection. For example, if you want to
download a large file, it will only go as fast as the speed of the
fastest ISP connection. The other WAN interfaces remain comatose
because there's no way to bond the single destination IP to two
different download streams and routes. You can download something
else using the 2nd WAN interface, but you can't use it to increase the
speed of the first. Uploading has a similar limitation, where you
can't improve the speed to a single connection. Where such routers
work best is if there is a LAN full of users sharing multiple WAN
connections, not for a single user looking for "better throughput..."

I've used a few of these with moderate success:
http://www.edimax.com/en/produce_list.php?pl1_id=3&pl2_id=
(See load balancing and multi-homing routers near bottom of page).


See, that is the thing with programmers, imagine it and we make it
happen ... if someone tells you "impossible" they are LYING! BIGTIME!


Incidentally, multiple cient radios, run to a passive combiner in a
single omni antenna is a total loser. The FCC specifically proscribes
synchronizing wi-fi radios. Even if the isolation can be increased
sufficiently to prevent receiver overload, it's highly probable that a
receive packet will arrive exactly when some other client radio goes
into transmit. Some relief can be obtained by using different
non-overlapping channels (1, 6, 11), but only with expensive bandpass
cavity filters. The spread spectrum spreads quite nicely into the
spectrum of the adjacent radio.


If you look for why something cannot be done, I believe it, you will
find it ... if you look how to make something happen, you will, most
likely succeed--given the time and investment of energy ...

Naysayers abound, this group is an excellent place to find them, I don't
consider these people "assets." Frankly, I just ignore them and go
on--you will choose what you wish ... all you have to do is decide on
the path ... but then, something tells me you already have been told
this, and not just once.

Regards,
JS