update, I have ordered an NDX 2 which I will use with my XPS DR. I am having a long ethernet cable run from my verizon modem/router to the room where my NDX2 will be located so I can connect ethernet cable directly to my NDX2
However, my wifi signal to that hifi room is a bit weak. I saw the info on the google mesh wifi and was wondering if the 2 pak would be enough to get wifi to the room where my hifi is located.
My verizon modem/router is on the other side of the house. If I get the google mesh wifi, would a 2 pack be enough. My understanding is that the “google router” is wired directly to my verizon modem/router and the other google mesh pod would be situated on the other side of the house where my hifi is located, thereby improving wifi signal strength to the hifi room. I need the wifi to use for my ipad so that I can use the Naim app, and Qobuz app. So is a google mesh 2 pack a good fit for my purposes? I don`t really think I need the 3 pack since I only need to stretch the wifi to the other side of the house. I have a ranch house and the basement already gets decent wifi signal .
Need advice on this issue, david
Hi David,
A few things. It sounds like you only want wifi in that room, as you’ll have ethernet run there. I’d start with the 2 pack and see how good the wifi is in that room. The range is not infinite…and if the router is too far from the remote node, the service won’t be good. But you could in that case try putting the remote node 1 room closer to the router; it need not be in your hi fi room most likely.
Another thing – the Google Nest ‘system’ truly uses the Google “router” as a router – it assigns internal IP addresses to each remote node. And it uses a different internal IP address range than your FiOS router. In order to get your wired NDX2 and your wifi-connected Naim App to see each other, you’ll have to run the NDX2 through the Google Nest router too. This is what I do, as I have exactly the same setup you’re talking about (only with an ND555). You’ll still need to buy a little unmanaged switch, like the Netgear I mentioned.
Is the NDX2 going to be the ONLY device you want hard-wired to your router?? If so, setup is as follows: The Google Nest router has 2 ethernet ports. Connect the Google Nest router to the FiOS router via an ethernet patch cord to one of the ports. Connect the cable for the NDX2 to the other port of the Google Nest router.
IF you want to hard-wire more than just the NDX2, you’ll need to put an unmanaged switch between the Google Nest router and the NDX2 and other device(s).
After you connect it up this way, you’ll need to restart everything as it’ll be on a new internal IP address network.
(The FiOS router hands out internal Ip addresses in the range 192.168.00.X where X is 1-255. The Google Nest router uses, however, the range 192.168.86.X)
Hoping this doesn’t confuse too much. But it took me a few hours to figure out the IP address stuff and to figure out that I had to run my entire home network through the Google Nest router. It’s a great little router, however; no problems with it so far.
Very helpful Bart, thanks
I’m only connecting the ndx2, nothing else.
I’m wary of getting the google mesh until my dealer comes out next Sunday to set up the ndx2
I’m hoping that my WiFi strong enough signal to allow me to use Naim app and Qobuz (I’m typing on my iPad now right next to hifi).
I’m also hoping the my streaming experience won’t make me miss my cds2 (which I’m not yet selling)
-david
Another option would be to run 2 Ethernet lines to the HiFi room and connect one to a wireless access point WAP
OR connect the Ethernet line in the HiFi room to small switch and then from switch to NDX and another line from switch to WAP
Thanks jsa.
Recommend a good switch and good WAP please
David
Hi David,
There was a recent thread on exactly this topic, and it sort of pivoted to home mesh network products and installations.
I recommended what I use: Ubiqiti Switch-8 and UniFi AP-AC Lite. Really solid prosumer performance at about $100 per, straightforward set up on your network with their application via PC or running on your NAS (or they sell a compute-stick controller, but not needed here). Can use a PoE port on the switch to power the access point directly. Check out the tech overview on Ars Technica to get a sense of how much better home wifi can be than using your ISP modem / router / access point.
Others thought Ubiquiti set up and managed devices were too much hassle: the classic /well-performing unmanaged switch for home use is probably the D-Link DG-105 (5 ports, several flavours in plastic or metal; get a GigaBit version for preference).
There isn’t an obvious favourite access point from the home brands that I’ve seen recommended here, but D-Link have the DAP-2610 and TP Link have the EAP-245, while Linksys have the LACAP-xxx series… you get the idea!
You don’t need to become a guru network admin to add a switch and an access point, and all of these products are scaleable in the sense that you can add additional units elsewhere in your home, one by one, and slowly but surely enhance your wifi performance everywhere… adding them with wired connections is the best, but using them wirelessly is also possible if that’s what you need or want.
IMHO, you are not in need of a wireless mesh network solution for your current project, and certainly the complexity of using the Google product - which insists on replacing your existing router - is not worthwhile.
Best wishes as you launch this cool new streaming adventure!
Regards alan
This is a strange statement and at odd with the Google simplicity design principle!!!
Hi Quinn -
I have not used the Google Nest system, but with @Bart saying it needs to act as a router, it did not appear to be a “simple design” philosophy and would very likely be much more complex than adding an access point to the existing network already established via the ISP router… sorry if this came across as strange to you: I was mainly trying to advocate for the “simple design” and steer clear of the “you need a home network wifi mesh solution” direction that other threads have taken here.
Happy to hear if you’ve had a much simpler installation case using Google!
Regards, alan
Unless you think your design of a router is better than the mind of more than 1,000 university professors working @ Google?
The Google mesh wifi is just truly a plug and play really, you just plonk it in and it works. No more complicated than this. Please do not worry about anything like IP addresses, IP4 or IP6, etc.
Clearly I’ve offended you somehow, but it was not intentional… I did not design a router, nor second guess product development at Google. There are many ways to improve wifi in your home, of course, and mesh is certainly one of them. Enjoy the Google Nest system. Take care, stay healthy.
Regards, alan
No problem, but I would encourage you guys take a deep look what it is about the mesh wifi system, it is not the same as wifi extender!
Okay, this is a bit silly now and I feel like you are making strange and aggressive claims that are moving towards accusations: nobody said anything that should lead you to suggest that there is confusion between adding additional wifi access points as opposed to adding a wifi extender… Take care, out.
Apologies, maybe I mis-understood the message, but many folks just simply equate wifi extender as wifi mesh.
I have done just that. One ethernet lead feeds my Ether Regen switch into my Melco N1 then ND555 and the other lead goes to an Airport Express in bridge mode which acts as a second wireless access point remote from my main ISP router in the office.
Hmm, possibly but the web is reasonably full of issues with Google wifi for those that want anything other than the banal… so I certainly would not consider it simpler than many other consumer offerings, albeit the very latest version does appear improved over earlier google wifi products.
Google tech support for the post appears conducted on a Reddit sub forum, as well as on support.google.com , although there is much useful info here and helpful discussion, I can’t help thinking if you don’t have much of a technical background or understanding you might find it a little bewildering.
https://www.reddit.com/r/GoogleWiFi/
Luckily in the UK in my humble opinion we have better plug and play consumer products that are more benign to other uses and apps… but yes elsewhere in the world that choice might not exist and so the Google wifi might be a good fix for some uses where the user has a very straightforward home network, and low complexity / simple applications.
That I agree with, and on this forum I frequently discourage the use of wifi extenders… the way to go is cooperating access points or wifi ‘mesh’.
Probably you mis-understand what it means by mesh wifi?
I doubt it as I earn a good living from designing mesh and other wifi solutions, and these work across the UK.
Mesh is largely used a consumer term for EasyMesh from the Wifi Alliance or similar wifi now. True mesh is not limited to wifi and uses various technologies in a WMN and used in IoT and low power distributed mesh systems.
I am not sure, judging from you posts about mesh wifi and others, it seems to me that you are an expert abut hardware and firmware, but networking is more than that, it is 99% about software technology.
Spent a long time writing networking software here in the Bay Area here.
One should understand that networking is the provision of IT infrastructure, and consists of architectures and topologies that enable services.
How the elements are realized whether in hardware, firmware, software, or physical or virtual doesn’t matter. But on this forum I simply offer a helping hand sometimes to those with issues with basic networking products getting in the way of their streaming… my ‘expertise’ doesn’t lie in consumer systems… this is just friendly personal advice and discussion in my downtime. I don’t believe we know each other professionally.
These days many networking enabling functions are achieved through ASICs and/or software, ie that is software defined networking. This can be physical or virtual. Many networking functions/ virtual appliances for example can be spun up in Azure for example.
The fact of whether it’s software or discrete physical hardware is largely inconsequential. One shouldn’t fall into the trap of thinking SDN is only about ‘software design’, it’s about the architecture and topology.
Sure orchestrators can set a level of abstraction so network functions can be ‘hidden’ behind other functions, but they are still there. Someone has got to design and configure the orchestrators in the first place… and indeed apply them.
With regard to true mesh, I assume California has wide area mesh networks like LoRaNet and others… which we are starting to introduce more and more in the UK or IoT application. That is a very interesting development in mesh technologies at the moment.