Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best way to get internet access 300ft to an exteranal buil..

Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
October 6, 2004 4:47:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi, i need to get internet access into a building that is being used as an
office. It is 300ft from my house and my ADSL, there is a clear line of
sight from the ADSL socket to the corner of the buidling but not to where
the computer would be. Whats the best way to do this? Could i use a wireless
network, can they reach that far? Or would i be better off to put a cat5
cable through?

thanks,

chris
October 6, 2004 4:47:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi

Choices are always amazing aren't they?

1. Wired is ALWAYS the best way to go over wireless as you have the
physical connection. This type connection also provides security as you
would also have to have access to the end points, or break the cable to
snoop. 300 ft on a 10/100 connection *should* work. Packet loss in the
form of framing errors will rise as TX <-> RX gets further apart, which
drops your connection speed.

2. Wireless should be easier as you can 'point and shoot' with two
directional's. Security in the middle probably wouldn't be a problem,
as the snoop would have to be "in the beam". Security at the end points
is another matter as it all don't drain down YOUR antenna, some does go
by and could be monitored by another in the next block, mile, etc....
You should be able to enhance security with a VPN between the buildings.

In #1, if you have a place for a cable run, do it. Run two as cable is
cheap JIC.

In #2, wireless connections are usually cheaper than labor to put the
cable in; depending on your circumstance.

have fun!


chrisj wrote:
> Hi, i need to get internet access into a building that is being used as an
> office. It is 300ft from my house and my ADSL, there is a clear line of
> sight from the ADSL socket to the corner of the buidling but not to where
> the computer would be. Whats the best way to do this? Could i use a wireless
> network, can they reach that far? Or would i be better off to put a cat5
> cable through?
>
> thanks,
>
> chris
>
>
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
October 6, 2004 1:44:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Wed, 6 Oct 2004 00:47:18 +0100, "chrisj" <a@b.c> wrote:

>Hi, i need to get internet access into a building that is being used as an
>office. It is 300ft from my house and my ADSL, there is a clear line of
>sight from the ADSL socket to the corner of the buidling but not to where
>the computer would be. Whats the best way to do this? Could i use a wireless
>network, can they reach that far? Or would i be better off to put a cat5
>cable through?

I always run cable where possible. Wireless should be a last restort.
A 300ft distance between buildings usually means 400ft of CAT5 wire.
I've gone up to 950ft with CAT5 between two 10baseT switched ports (on
two switches of course). No problems. Just don't try it at 100baseT
or with a hub. If you have conduit, run CAT5.

I prefer using coax cable for the job because it's easier to find
messenger wired or buriable RG-6/u or RG-11/u than it is to find
weatherproof CAT5. I also don't like to work with the slimey goo used
in waterproof CAT5. 10base2 coax cable will work up to about 1000ft
using two media converters at each end.

See my previous rants on the subject of abusing cabling standards:
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=5uotd0hfdeqsdmmgih4go...
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=v27ud0pveqfnlcgemnfgq...

At 300ft, wireless should be easy if you're shooting through a window
and have line of sight. However, if you put a few walls in the way,
the composition of the walls will make a big difference. You can use
directional antennas to compensate for the loss, but if your building
has metal in the walls, no amount of power will work. That means
outside antennas and coax cable runs.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
October 6, 2004 8:39:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

OldGuy <todh@yesterdayspc.com> wrote:
> 1. Wired is ALWAYS the best way to go over wireless as you have the
> physical connection. This type connection also provides security as you
> would also have to have access to the end points, or break the cable to
> snoop. 300 ft on a 10/100 connection *should* work.

Mind the electrical isolation, though. In the UK the buildings could be
on different phase, giving a potential 440v difference in the event of
an electrical short. "Ouch" doesn't quite cut it in this situation.

Chris
!