> We need to fix some terminology here,...don't be offended,...but we can't
> do anything if we don't know what each other is talking about.....
>
>> All AP's have a static IP on the internal domain (192.168.16.x).
>
> That's not a Domain,..it is an IP Segment. There is no relationship at all
> between Domains and IP Ranges.  The can be dozens of domains on a single
> IP segment,...and there can also be dozens of IP segments on a single
> domain.
> >>My mistaks.

>>  Primary AP  is wired to the switch.
>
> All APs have to be wired to a switch. This implies that some other AP
> isn't wired to anything.
>>>> I guess I was misinformed then when I started this proccess a year ago.
>>>> The local Microsoft dealer here suggested the switch and AP's, and
>>>> D-Link has not said anything about all AP's having to be wired.

>> I have 2 VLAN's set up for wireless - one to allow access to the LAN and
>> the other for Guests.
>
> VLans are tied to the IP segments,..you only mentioned
> 192.168.16.0,...what's the other one.
>>>> I didn't know that.  On the switch I have them tied to 192.168.16.x (my
>>>> default VLAN), 192.168.17.x (wireless LAN access), and 192.168.18.x
>>>> (Guest access).  I did this under L3 Features > IP Interface Settings.

>> All AP's are in AP mode - any other mode and I can't use multiple
>> SSID's/VLAN's.
>
> ....And you can't have VLANs if you didn't actually create a VLAN and have
> a LAN Router configured to do the routing between the VLANs.  Just simply
> configuring a VLAN on an isolated Switch or AP does nothing more than
> create an unreachable virtual IP segment.
>>>> I'll contact D-Link to ffind out what they recommend for this point.
>>>> (hardware)

>> Primary SSID is set for LAN access, and the first MSSID is set for Guest
>> access.
>
> What is a MSSID?
>>>> Multiple SSID (must be a D-Link term)

>> Setup works fine for the wired AP on both SSID's,
>
> All APs are wireless or they aren't an AP. Of course they are also all
> wired on the LAN side of them,  but I have no idea what you mean by a
> "wired AP" -vs- a ??  wireless AP??
>>>> Wireless AP is one that is not wired/cabled to anything.

>>but I can't get abything more than a connection with the other SSID's.
>
> What "other" SSID?
>>>> The SSID's on each of the other AP's.

>>  It tries to acquire an IP and fails/times out.
>
> Well you can not have VLANs without a LAN Router.  Creating VLANs only
> does just that,...it creates the VLAN from that one particular device's
> perspective,...but it in no way provides for a means the route between
> VLANs,...that requires a LAN Router.  ISA has the ability to act as a very
> retrictive but limited LAN Router, but you have not indicated that you
> have set it up to be that.
>>>>OK

> Once a LAN Router is established between two VLANs it must have DHCP Relay
> configured on it so that it will pass DHCP Queries to the DHCP Server from
> the opposite segment.  But you would not do that on ISA, in part because
> it is on the same box as the DHCP Server in the case of SBS.
>>>>OK

> The DHCP Server requires a separate distinct Scope for each IP Segment (no
> Superscopes!!).
>>> OK

> --
> Phillip Windell
> www.wandtv.com
>
> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
> Microsoft, or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>

"Phillip Windell" <philwind***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u88D7Y0CIHA.4584@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> "Mike Webb" <Mike_W***@whoopingcrane.org> wrote in message
> news:uAAKKmqCIHA.3400@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
> Ok, let's see if I can clarify some things.
>
>> I guess I was misinformed then when I started this proccess a year ago.
>> The local Microsoft dealer here suggested the switch and AP's, and D-Link
>> has not said anything about all AP's having to be wired.
>
> They are wireless between themself and the Users.
> They are wired between themself and the LAN
>
>> I didn't know that.  On the switch I have them tied to 192.168.16.x (my
>> default VLAN), 192.168.17.x (wireless LAN access), and 192.168.18.x
>> (Guest access).  I did this under L3 Features > IP Interface Settings.
>
> Ok, good. That means this is a Layer3 Switch which is a Switch and a LAN
> Router built into the same piece of hardware. When speaking of the Layer3
> abilities I will call it a router. When speaking of the Layer2 function I
> will call it a Switch.  So I will treat it as if it were two different
> devices even though it is all built into one box.  You need to think of it
> that way to understand what it is going on with it.
>
> The three VLANs will group the Switches ports into three groups.  You plug
> the correct AP into it's proper group of ports.  Each group of switch
> ports represent one "router interface".
>
> Then enable the routing abilities and configure the DHCP Relay (sometimes
> called Helper Addresses) that point to the IP# of the DHCP Server
>
> Configure ACLs on the Router to control what the Guest IP Segment is
> allowed to access,...if you don't the Guest segment means nothing at all
> and it is just another segment with the same access as anything else.
>
> On the DHCP Server you will have three scopes,...three regular
> scopes,...no superscopes.  Configure ech scope according to what it needs.
>
>>> All APs are wireless or they aren't an AP. Of course they are also all
>>> wired on the LAN side of them,  but I have no idea what you mean by a
>>> "wired AP" -vs- a ??  wireless AP??
>
>> Wireless AP is one that is not wired/cabled to anything.
>
> No. That would be a useless piece of hardware needlessly burning
> electricity.  An AP is only wireless between itself and the Clients with
> Wireless Nics,...but the other side of it needs to be wired into the LAN
> or it does not do anything.
>
> An AP is the same thing as a Switch but it just doesn't need wires to
> connect the Clients to it,...but it still needs to be physically attached
> to the LAN.
>
>
> --
> Phillip Windell
> www.wandtv.com
>
> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
> Microsoft, or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>

"Phillip Windell" <philwind***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uQoHp%231CIHA.5712@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> "Mike Webb" <Mike_W***@whoopingcrane.org> wrote in message
> news:ekkLSZ1CIHA.4952@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> Great info, thanks.
>>
>> As to your last point, what do you recommend then for the remote
>> buildings? They are all within 400 yards of the main antenna.  I would
>> like to get the signal to each of them so that any client anywhere in
>> those buildings can connect.
>
> Most typical APs are only going to reach about 350feet (not yards) and
> anything over 100 feet or so is going to have the speed degrade down to a
> crawl.  The longer the distance, the slower it goes.
>
> Run cabling to each building.  The maximum cable length is 100 yards.
> Anything longer than that will require a repeater or bridge (can use a
> cheap hub or switch) and a powered weather proof building to put it in.
> You can optionally use Fiber Optic to get more distance and the distance
> varies with what exact type of Fiber you use and whether the Fiber Optic
> hardware uses Laser emitters or LED emiters.
>
> Another option is high-end ($$$$) wireless technology that may possibly
> even get into microwave technology.  Regaurdless of the specific details
> of the wireless devices, you will be building a Wireless Bridge to jump
> the gap between the buildings.  This is *NOT* the same thing as the
> wireless link between a Client and an Access Point.  A bridged link runs
> one AP in "Infrastructure Mode" and the other in "Acces Point Mode"  (kind
> of like Master/Slave) and they are locked to only communicating with each
> other and nothing else.
>
> Once you jump the gap you have to go back to cable to get down into the
> building where you can then hook up a standard  AP within the building to
> have the users connect to that.  Depending on the size of those it may
> take several APs to cover the building.  Ours is a single floor and
> roughly 200 feet by 150 feet and would take about 4 APs.
>
> *Important*,..you cannot go 100% wireless in the building because most
> wireless nics in machines do not activate and connect until after the user
> has logged in and reached the Desktop,...this means a new user cannot log
> on because their is no cached profile on the machine.  The machine has to
> be connected by cable the first time to logon so that the user profile
> gets created.  They are fine from that point unless you have a Password
> Expiration Policy.
>
> One source for equipment that may be reasonably priced is from Tranzeo
> (www.tranzeo.com).  We have a couple of their TR-5A Series Devices to span
> the between our TV Station's main building  and the Tranmitter building
> about 14 miles away and operate at 5.7 ghz.. They run over a pair of
> parabolic dish antennas mounted about 150 feet high that are also aready
> running a 7ghz signal that carries out 1 Analog and  2 HDTV broadcast
> signals.  Unfortunately we are having trouble with them that we suspect is
> interference from someone else's signal and have not nailed it down yet.
> Granted that this is more powerful than you need, but Tranzeo probably has
> some lighter weight stuff at a lower cost.
>
> There could be more to the story as well, but I don't know your exact
> situation and don't know how much info or ideas you want me the bury you
> with.
>
> You might want to consider just having a fast internet connection at each
> building and connecting them with a Site-to-Site VPN (aka a
> Router-to-Router VPN) by using routing devices designed for that purpose.
> A Site-to-Site VPN is a specific type,...do not confuse it with the common
> Remote Access VPN. The building would use VPN to communicate with each
> other, but for Internet access they would use their own independent
> Internet Link with their own independent Firewall.  The Firewall and the
> VPN Device are often the same device.  Once the buildings are linked you
> can use APs on the interior of the buildings for wireless access.
>
> Bottom line for wireless,...wirless networks only *supplement* or expand a
> wired network,...they never replace it.
>
> --
> Phillip Windell
> www.wandtv.com
>
> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or
> Microsoft, or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>