Dual Band Airport Extreme only transmitting on 2.4mhz

I have a dual band AE base station. I've followed the instructions to set it up for 802.11n (802.11 b/g compatible) mode since I have iPhones, a 2004 iMac (g only), and iPod Touches needed to use the connection. All is well (everything connects), but when I check the network with iStumbler, all it sees is the 2.4ghz network, even though it calls it an "n" network. If I reset the AEBS as "n" only, iStumbler reports it as 5ghz. I have the system set up as WDS using an Airport Express to repeat the 802.11g to my downstairs and provide AirTunes.

Is this something that iStumbler won't see, or is there something I set wrong in AEBS?

There isn't much to setup - by default with radio mode set to automatic you should have the 5G/2.4G bands. If I look at the summary tabs I see 2 MAC addresses on my time capsule one for the 5G one for the 2.4G. Also iStumbler can see my 5G and 2.4G radio/MAC addresses no problem.

Under wireless -> wireless network options -> checkbox for 5GHz network name. If you check that and put in a different network name does the 5GHz network show up? For example call it myhomenetwork5ghz - you should see that name with a channel of 149 (assuming everything is default)

I've also found that the 5Ghz isn't very good for indoors. If you are next to the AEBS or have a fairly open floorplan you may be OK but if you are trying to find your 5GHz from somewhere in the house with a lot of stuff between you and the AEBS - the 5GHz may not reach you.

okay -- so the problem was while I bought a simultaneous dual band extreme on ebay, what I received was a dual band (not simultaneous) extreme. So what I'm trying to do is use the new extreme as an 802.11n base for the new iMac, and my old "white dome" extreme for a separate 802.11g network for the older iMac and iPhones -- and I want to use an airport express to extend the 802.11g network and use AirTunes.

At one time I had an article that walked through this, but I cannot find it and google hasn't helped. Can anybody walk me through this? Right now I have the New Extreme hooked to my DSL modem and set up as a dedicated 802.11n network (ssid "n"). I plugged by dome extreme into the New Extreme via ethernet (not WAN port) and set it up as dedicated 802.11g (ssid "g"). I tried to set up the express as a WDS remote. It "seems" to all work, but the iPhones are showing weak signal when right next to the express. I think I may have set something wrong. The dome extreme seems to be working but Airport Utility is saying "ethernet unplugged" b/c I think it wants to see the plug in the WAN port - but I don't think that's correct.

On the dome and express, I've set "internet connection" to "off (bridge mode)" as I recall that was needed to avoid DHCP conflicts.

Anyway, I've got internet on both old iMac and iPhones (the g network) and on the new iMac (n network), so it "works" but I'm not sure this isn't just dumb luck and I've got something wrong.

Just out of curiosity - what is the ultimate goal of running the 5GHz band?

Keep in mind that the higher up you go in the spectrum, the shorter the effective range of the radio. 5GHz is great if you're close to it or want to segregate higher bandwidth consumption devices, but less desirable if you're trying to cover an entire home.

cwa107 said:

Just out of curiosity - what is the ultimate goal of running the 5GHz band?

Click to expand...

"Schweb" has one of these dual band Airport Extreme Base Stations...and we swapped a couple posts. If I understand it correctly...the two bands broadcasting simultaneously ("g" on one band and "n" on the other) allows both "g" and "n" devices on the same network to run at optimum speeds.

Again if I understand it correctly...with a router broadcasting on a single band/frequency...if there are both "g" and "n" devices on the network at the same time...I think that the "g" devices slow things down for the "n" devices.

My suggested "solution" to this was (if you didn't want to pay $179 for the dual-band Airport Extreme Base Station). If you had a home with mixed devices (g & n)...you could setup two networks (two routers)...one for "g" devices & one for "n" devices. Obviously the router for the "n" devices would have to be a router capable of broadcasting "n" (for the faster throughput).

So in my case...I could used my "old" "g" router for my "g" devices...and purchase a nice new D-Link Dir-655 ($65) for the "n" devices...and be running two routers. Only problem with this setup is (I think) is if you wanted the "g" devices & "n" devices to be able to network (talk with each other). Since they would be on separate networks...this may not be an easy thing to do. But if you just wanted "straight-up" internet access...then everything is fine.

As far as the 2.4ghz vs. 5.0ghz frequencies...not sure about that. Just the way Apple has the Airport Extreme base station (AEBS) doing it I guess.

- Nick

p.s. Here's a quote from the Apple website about the AEBS:

"Simultaneous dual-band Wi-Fi.

For maximum range and compatibility, AirPort Extreme works simultaneously on both the 2.4GHz and 5GHz bands, allowing all the devices on the network to use the most efficient band automatically. It uses the latest 802.11n wireless technology, so you can enjoy up to five times the Wi-Fi performance and up to twice the range of 802.11g wireless networks.2 And improvements in antenna design give you up to 50 percent better performance and up to 25 percent better range than with the previous-generation AirPort Extreme Base Station."

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC340LL/A/AirPort-Extreme?fnode=MTY1NDA0Mg&mco=MTMzNzU2NDk

I want the newer devices that are "n" capable to have an "n" network, and the "g" devices a "g" network to improve speed and throughput particularly on the "n" devices. I'm going to buy an "n" express since this is how I stream Netflix (it delivers the network to my Samsung blue ray with Netflix). Since I already had the "n" extreme, I just bought a used "g" extreme (dome) for $25 to act as the 2nd router for the "g" network.

As of now, the computers all "see" each other and are accessible, even though the new iMac is on the "n" network and the older one is on the "g" network. I can access each from the other, pull or send files, etc. The new one is clearly showing it's on the "n" network at 300 Mbps, and the old one shows it's on the "g" network at 54 Mbps (separate ssid's for each).

Airport utility shows all three devices (n extreme, g extreme, and g express). Which seems a bit odd since I would have thought the old iMac would not be able to "see" the n extreme since it doesn't operate at that frequency.

All are "green" in Airport Utility, except in manual set up the dome extreme ("g") still shows a yellow marker on "status" as "ethernet unplugged" -- which is saying nothing is connected to the WAN port (which is true), but I think that may just be a quirk since it's getting its internet through ethernet LAN connected to the "n" extreme (which is connected by WAN to my DSL modem).

You don't need "N" streaming for Netflix.

Netflix could at best only stream as fast as your internet connection which is going to be slower than "G" speeds anyway (54 mbps). In reality, Netflix, even for HD, is streaming at less than 10mpbs which can easily be handled by "G" speeds.

"N" speeds only really are important for wireless sharing of large files between computers on your network. It won't help at all for things streamed or downloaded from the Internet.

schweb said:

You don't need "N" streaming for Netflix.

Netflix could at best only stream as fast as your internet connection which is going to be slower than "G" speeds anyway (54 mbps). In reality, Netflix, even for HD, is streaming at less than 10mpbs which can easily be handled by "G" speeds.

"N" speeds only really are important for wireless sharing of large files between computers on your network. It won't help at all for things streamed or downloaded from the Internet.

Click to expand...

Schweb...thanks for those additional thoughts concerning "n" wireless speeds!!! Very helpful when someone is considering an "n" router upgrade!!!

- Nick

Schweb -- please don't take this the wrong way as I appreciate your thoughts, but that opinion is about the necessity of 802.11n, and I'm focusing on implementation. It's a bit like the old joke of the guy who goes to the doctor and says, "Doc, it hurts when I raise my arm" and the Doc says, "Don't raise your arm." I think you're basically saying don't worry about 802.11n 'cause I don't need it. Fair enough, but like a lot of folks I've invested in 802.11n hardware and would like to implement it.

I don't disagree with your assessment, and yet 802.11n is now the standard being offered for home routers and computers. I understand the point that it's a much bigger pipe than the typical residential broadband connection provides (and therefore it's not the limiting factor), but we also rarely need the CPU power we have (and yet we lust after ever more powerful chipsets). I imagine that 99% of home users don't tap 10% of their computer's capability most of the time -- we still pony up thousands for the latest and greatest.

I'll keep digging for that article that explained how to do this. Thanks for the thoughts.

You stated that you wanted N for Netflix streaming.

You're right, you could use N for that, but I wanted to make sure that for others reading this thread that N is not required or necessary to get HD Netflix streaming. Just didn't want people to be confused or feel they needed to upgrade when they don't.

Netflix is part -- mostly like a lot folks I now have a "mixed" environment with g and n devices in the same house. I understand that (like in the days of "b" and "g" environments) the lower standard sets the pace for the whole network, so the "n" systems don't get the benefit of that technology (which may not be much in a practical sense).

The dual network scenario Pigoo mentions is what I've done.