WAP for under $100

Bampu

You get what you pay for. These cheap AP devices don't reach their speed limits. If you can live with that then get whatever highly rated device you can find because unless you are going to spend hundreds whatever /g/ seriously suggests will be outside your budget.

>>58490484
I don't really care if it doesn't reach max speeds, I'm still bottlenecked by my ISP at 100mbps and I don't have too many LAN transfers other than to my backup server.

Never heard of it. Does it use dd-wrt liek my buffalo router?

>>58490556
Mmm no. It's only an AP and it runs some Ubiquiti software on it.

We use them at work theyre ok for a mesh setup using the bundled webapp software. For a single access point you could prob do better for the money.

>>58490249

You should have gotten down on the Ubiquiti US-AP-HDs they were just selling. $175 and you get 4x4:4 which you can't even get from Cisco at the moment. Cisco is doing some sort of double 5GHz voodoo with the 3802s that gives a max connection of 5.2Gb/s but it's still 3 spacial streams.

My whole infrastructure is Cisco and Nortel. I just picked up two of the US-AP-HDs and will pickup three of the US-AP-SHDs once they release. Ubiquiti has upped their game.

>>58490683
Cisco equipment can do ac wave 2. Wave 2 is superior to really anything ever but its not really supported yet on clients.

Also there is no reason for 1gbit+ connectivity unless you have a million PCs on your wireless all transferring files at over 100 mbit/s. Anything else is just autism

>>58490484
Ubiquiti APs are okay, but I've found that older models have range and stability issues in signal-dense areas. Running your own controller for a home wifi network is a bit of a hassle, too (not to mention needing a PoE switch), but it could be worth it if you have 4+ APs or if you want to extend your network across multiple sites (like having the same SSIDs for your home, your parents' home, etc). But for corporate/hotel/large home installs I'd go Meraki despite the expense, as I've had much better experiences with them than I have with Ubiquiti.

For an apartment or small home, Netgear Orbi if you want mesh, and I guess a TP-Link Archer if you want cheap shit.

>>58490707
>Cisco equipment can do ac wave 2.

Yes, I know. I manage a constellation of 3802i's.

>>58490707
>Wave 2 is superior to really anything ever but its not really supported yet on clients.

Yes, I know. I'm trying the Ubiquiti equipment to see if I want to replace my Cisco 2x2:1 WAPs at home. The Ubiquitis are wave 2.

>>58490707
>Also there is no reason for 1gbit+ connectivity unless you have a million PCs on your wireless all transferring files at over 100 mbit/s.

Or perhaps you want to be able to stream UHD media to multiple devices without lag or stuttering. It also makes it easy to move files around since you don't have to go to a port. This morning I was updating the ISOs on my VMware cluster from the toilet.

>>58490707
>Anything else is just autism.

StopLIkingWhatIDontLike.ogg

>>58491033
>Ubiquiti APs are okay, but I've found that older models have range and stability issues in signal-dense areas. Running your own controller for a home wifi network is a bit of a hassle, too (not to mention needing a PoE switch), but it could be worth it if you have 4+ APs or if you want to extend your network across multiple sites (like having the same SSIDs for your home, your parents' home, etc). But for corporate/hotel/large home installs I'd go Meraki despite the expense, as I've had much better experiences with them than I have with Ubiquiti.

The gen 1 Ubiquiti gear was garbage. The gen 2 ran hot under load. Gen 3 seems to be pretty sweet. Their cloud key seems to give you the Meraki experience without the ongoing cost. If you don't like their management interface you can flash their gear with CucumberTony and get damn near the exact same interface as Meraki.

I have some Meraki gear. i don't really care for it unless you're stuck in a Cisco only shop and have a lot of field offices. I wish their hardware was more performant. Especially for the money. It's not expensive, it's expensive for the performance. I'd rather have the 3802 mobility bundle.

I'm only running a single AP, by the way, and I'm in an apartment but I need something that will work with my ClearOS router I've got.

>>58491260
>I'm only running a single AP, by the way, and I'm in an apartment but I need something that will work with my ClearOS router I've got.

That's pretty much any WAP.

Also, why are you running Clear?

>>58491290
Because I'm using a Neptune Ethernet card I pulled out of an old computer, and I couldn't find any working drivers on pfSense.

Yeah, pretty much my only thing is having AC because only getting N doesn't seem worth it to me. Also something that'll work well in a signal dense environment because of all the neighbors and shit.

>>58491170
>his morning I was updating the ISOs on my VMware cluster from the toilet.

Give me ONE (1) Single Reason why any NON AUTIST would be running a VMWARE CLUSTER

>>58491334
>Because I'm using a Neptune Ethernet card I pulled out of an old computer, and I couldn't find any working drivers on pfSense.

No offence, serious question. Do you have an onion cage?

If not, can't you buy a $20 modern NIC so you can run a significantly better router?


>>58491375
>Give me ONE (1) Single Reason why any NON AUTIST would be running a VMWARE CLUSTER

Because I'm a consultant and have to constantly lab customer issues. Aside from non-profits and government, a vast majority of the private sector is on VMware right now, with an increasing amount on RHEV.

Why are you hating on my cluster?

The Open Mesh OM5P-AC is a swing north of that price point by about $30 but is the least expensive 802.11ac option I would suggest anyone use. Anything less and you're just shooting yourself in the foot for having an AP with a ton of throughput but no ability to deliver due to bugs and performance bottlenecks.

Another reason I like Open Mesh hardware is not having to host a controller on my own or onsite for whoever will be using the access points and they carry configuration between model without any problem.

I've heard some positive things about the new google wifi access points but I can't recommend them because >botnet and I haven't tested them myself.

>>58491492
>Another reason I like Open Mesh hardware is not having to host a controller on my own or onsite for whoever will be using the access points and they carry configuration between model without any problem.

CucumberTony does that for a ton of hardware without having to use the crappy Open Mesh hardware.

>>58491445
An onion cage? Is this some Tor thing? Also, what's wrong with Clear?

>>58491625
>An onion cage? Is this some Tor thing?

https://imgur.com/a/OH1lW


>>58491625
>Also, what's wrong with Clear?

Nothing wrong with it. It's just not developed as far with as many available features as pfSense.

File: Selection_105.png (161KB, 1695x865px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 1695x865px

>>58491615
Why would I waste time loading random hardware with special snowflake firmware and then be forced to maintain hodge-podge deployments of various crappy hardware when there is a proper solution with good hardware already?

I've used OM equipment for years where Meraki is just too fucking expensive and it's never been a problem. I even run some residential wireless networks on the older 802.11n units and those deal with it well.

>>58491704
>Why would I waste time loading random hardware with special snowflake firmware

>OpenWRT

>special snowflake firmware

>all-my-yuks.empeethree

Open Mesh is like Meraki and Netgear fucked but the baby came out retarded.

>>58491697
Kek, what an interesting thread, but sadly, no.

Any 4 port gigabit NIC you recommend around that $20 price point you mentioned? I could go for a 2 port, but then I'd need a switch.

>>58491758
From someone who clearly hasn't given it much of a glance. Well, you tell me why I would *start* with a modified base of hardware for a new deployment when there are already par or better solutions with centralized support who aren't going to boo me for using unsupported firmware on their equipment when there is a problem?

Nobody outside of the IT department water cooler safe zone is going to unironically imply that selling modified equipment is a good idea. And on top of that, assuming a customer had compatible equipment that would take that firmware, why would I want to support their old shit? Then it starts failing some months later and its my fault? It's the special software I put on their shit? No, faggot.

Maybe in your own home you are willing to accept OpenWRT on whatever you want. Or perhaps if someone supported and shipped equipment already loaded to use that platform it would be okay. Otherwise I don't see the point.

>>58491802
>Any 4 port gigabit NIC you recommend around that $20 price point you mentioned? I could go for a 2 port, but then I'd need a switch.

I've picked up Mellanox and Chelsea cards on ebay for $10-$20 each. Some with two ports, four ports of both GbE and SFP+ and one QSFP.

Can we get back to the OP? What's a good WAP for around $100? I'm looking as well, don't need router have nice pfsense box.

>>58491842
>From someone who clearly hasn't given it much of a glance. Well, you tell me why I would *start* with a modified base of hardware for a new deployment when there are already par or better solutions with centralized support who aren't going to boo me for using unsupported firmware on their equipment when there is a problem?

I wouldn't ever sell it. But I'd use Ubiquiti with a cloud key over Open Mesh. Every time. I don't even like Ubiquiti beyond their current generation WAPs. If that wasn't good enough I'd go to Meraki.

The original thread title was for a low cost WAP. CucumberTony lets you run a normal firmware (OpenWRT), on just about any hardware, and get modern capabilities.

>>58491862
Any links?

Can someone tell me of the downside of hooking my modem directly into my PC and hosting a wireless network from it?

>>58491947
You're basically using your computer as a router, no real downsides.

>>58491935
The only ones I see for less than $20 are Riverbed, which will work in a computer. I don't know if there are BSD drivers for them though. For $40 you can get an awesome, low cost intel card.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-Intel-I350-T4-PCI-Express-PCI-E-Four-RJ45-Gigabit-Ports-Server-Adapter-NIC-/251590258135?hash=item3a93f2add7:g:03UAAOSwQJhUdvyS

>>58492222
Looks good, will grab one.

So, the question still remains: which AP?

>>58491947
>Can someone tell me of the downside of hooking my modem directly into my PC and hosting a wireless network from it?

Well if your modem is a modem and not a router too, you're exposing your computer to background internet bot traffic. Generally every home router offers NAT protection where unsolicited traffic from the internet coming to your IP is ignored by the router. The only traffic let back in is what's called "stateful traffic" which means that it was solicited by a computer on the inside of the network. Basically one of your computers asked for information and a computer on the internet answered.

If you have an internet connection you generally get a public IP, meaning anyone with access to the internet can send traffic to your IP. There are many nefarious people who run programs called bots that systematically work their way through strings of IPs attempting to do bad things to the computers on the other side. There is a list of known vulnerabilities that affect information systems, run by NIST.

https://nvd.nist.gov/

These vulnerabilities could affect your computer, your router, your printer, your phone, or even your refrigerator. Manufacturers release patches to mitigate these vulnerabilities but users must apply the patches. Frequently they don't and bots systematically find these devices and exploit them. Your files could be stolen, deleted or held ransom.

Just an FYI, in my snort logs 10,000 entries only goes back about 25 hours. So there's about 10,000 bot attacks in a day, for my IP. Yours could be higher or lower. Use a security device. They're around for a reason.

>>58490556
You're dumb


Yea ubiquiti shit is great OP. Grab it. They're mostly based on debian

>>58492590
Thanks.