Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Stopping wireless router EM-waves

Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 21, 2005 12:50:10 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

My network topology uses a D-Link DI-624 AirPlus XtremeG wireless
router which has the 'Wireless Radio' option set to 'off' most of the
time (I occasionally turn it on for guests).

It occured to me that just because the 'Wireless radio' is set to 'off'
that it doesn't necessarily mean the transceiver is not emitting
electromagnetic signals, albeit useless ones. I thought perhaps
disabling this option only stops the router from processing wireless
signals.

The question is, does the actual transceiver stop emitting EM-waves
when the 'Wireless Radio' set to 'off'?
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 22, 2005 1:59:15 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Eric wrote:
> <schoenfeld1@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > My network topology uses a D-Link DI-624 AirPlus XtremeG wireless
> > router which has the 'Wireless Radio' option set to 'off' most of the
> > time (I occasionally turn it on for guests).
> >
> > It occured to me that just because the 'Wireless radio' is set to 'off'
> > that it doesn't necessarily mean the transceiver is not emitting
> > electromagnetic signals, albeit useless ones. I thought perhaps
> > disabling this option only stops the router from processing wireless
> > signals.
> >
> > The question is, does the actual transceiver stop emitting EM-waves
> > when the 'Wireless Radio' set to 'off'?
>
> My DLink routers and AP's, when set to "Radio Off", do just that: stop
> transmitting RF.
>
> They are all 802.11a/g/b, and therefore don't have removable antennas,
> though. (Dumb FCC reg prohibiting removable antennas for 5 Ghz 802.11a
> stuff, hopefully to change soon.)
>
> Wouldn't think the "Radio Off" function on the DI-624 would be any different
> though. DI-624 has a removable antenna, anyway? If you are paranoid, just
> remove the antenna whenever you don't need it.

DI-624 has internal antenna, and an attachable external one (for
stronger signals).

I'm 99% sure that switching radio off stops the transceiver altogether,
but you never know how things get implemented with these things. OTOH,
Antenta off could just stop signal processing but router still
transmits some signal, albeit of no relation to network data.



> Cheers
> Eric
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 22, 2005 2:31:20 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

On 21 Sep 2005 21:59:15 -0700, schoenfeld1@gmail.com wrote:

>I'm 99% sure that switching radio off stops the transceiver altogether,
>but you never know how things get implemented with these things. OTOH,
>Antenta off could just stop signal processing but router still
>transmits some signal, albeit of no relation to network data.

I don't have a DI-624, but my BEFW11S4 stops belching RF when the
wireless is set to "disabled". I tested it with two microwave oven
leakage detectors. I also watched the RF disappear on my Symbol
PPT4340 running as a spectrum analyzer. I can fire up the HP140T(?)
spectrum analyzer downstairs but that would require that I clean up my
mess and I don't want to do that right now.

What is your concern? That someone might have rewired your
transmitter to broadcast secret information of some sorts?


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Related resources
September 22, 2005 2:50:50 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

<schoenfeld1@gmail.com> wrote in message
> My network topology uses a D-Link DI-624 AirPlus XtremeG wireless
> router which has the 'Wireless Radio' option set to 'off' most of the
> time (I occasionally turn it on for guests).
>
> It occured to me that just because the 'Wireless radio' is set to 'off'
> that it doesn't necessarily mean the transceiver is not emitting
> electromagnetic signals, albeit useless ones. I thought perhaps
> disabling this option only stops the router from processing wireless
> signals.
>
> The question is, does the actual transceiver stop emitting EM-waves
> when the 'Wireless Radio' set to 'off'?

My DLink routers and AP's, when set to "Radio Off", do just that: stop
transmitting RF.

They are all 802.11a/g/b, and therefore don't have removable antennas,
though. (Dumb FCC reg prohibiting removable antennas for 5 Ghz 802.11a
stuff, hopefully to change soon.)

Wouldn't think the "Radio Off" function on the DI-624 would be any different
though. DI-624 has a removable antenna, anyway? If you are paranoid, just
remove the antenna whenever you don't need it.

Cheers
Eric
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 22, 2005 8:12:27 AM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On 21 Sep 2005 21:59:15 -0700, schoenfeld1@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >I'm 99% sure that switching radio off stops the transceiver altogether,
> >but you never know how things get implemented with these things. OTOH,
> >Antenta off could just stop signal processing but router still
> >transmits some signal, albeit of no relation to network data.
>
> I don't have a DI-624, but my BEFW11S4 stops belching RF when the
> wireless is set to "disabled". I tested it with two microwave oven
> leakage detectors. I also watched the RF disappear on my Symbol
> PPT4340 running as a spectrum analyzer. I can fire up the HP140T(?)
> spectrum analyzer downstairs but that would require that I clean up my
> mess and I don't want to do that right now.
>
> What is your concern? That someone might have rewired your
> transmitter to broadcast secret information of some sorts?

It is still unclear if such non-ionising radiation cause dverse health
effects or not. Until then, I'd rather use RJ45 in my home.

>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
September 22, 2005 1:02:06 PM

Archived from groups: (More info?)

On 22 Sep 2005 04:12:27 -0700, schoenfeld1@gmail.com wrote:

>It is still unclear if such non-ionising radiation cause dverse health
>effects or not. Until then, I'd rather use RJ45 in my home.

I'm afraid it will probably never be scientifically clear[1]. You
might consider the effects of inverse square law. Double the distance
and 1/4th the radiation. That's why cell phones are a problem,
because they are very close to the head. That's also why cell towers
are not a problem, because they're usually too far away.

If it's an issue, I suggest reconfiguring your system. You already
have a DSL or cable modem. Get a cheap ethernet router such as a
DI-604. Then configure your DI-614 as an access point and not a
router. I can supply instructions if you want to do this. The router
section of the DI-624 is essentially disabled and the DI-604 does all
the internet stuff. This allows you to turn off the AC power to the
DI-624 when not in use. This has the added advantage of allowing you
to place the DI-624 in a better RF location such as higher up in the
room for better coverage.

[1] One of my friends did some research on the effects of RF exposure
at near cell phone frequencies. She repeated some of the more
interesting microbiological experiments and found that RF did indeed
cause changes in cellular structure and growth patterns. She was
about to scribble and submit her findings when someone suggested it
best to have her RF source calibrated and tested. The test equipment
was working, but the home made coax cable going to the test chamber
was shorted inside the connector resulting in no radiated RF at all.
In other words, the test results were all worthless and the subtle
observed changes were hallucinations. Methinks you'll find a similar
lack of a non-RF exposure reference control in many of the published
RF exposure tests.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
!