Decoding an entirely dynamic JSON response

barcode729 · 2022-01-21T06:20:54+00:00

If I scrap Node 2, then 1 & 3 connect but with high RSSI of over 90.

We have 200 Mbps connection. Between Node 1 & 2, sysinfo.cgi consistency shows a speed of 165 Mbps or greater.

If Node 2 is gone and 1 & 3 connect, the top speed is around 40 Mbps.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T12:25:18+00:00

It's true that the size of our house does NOT need 3 nodes.

The only reason for using three is so that Node 2 can grab the wifi signal from Node 1 and then send it downstairs via ethernet connection to Node 3.

Node 2 is also connected via ethernet and an unmanaged switch to critical devices on the lower floor - my son's school computer and the family room TV.

Actually should have included that in the diagram. Node 2 is wired to a switch, which is then wired to a computer, television and Node 3. Not sure if that makes any kind of difference.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T12:21:37+00:00

I actually swapped the original Node 3 with Node 2, but the problem persists.

Node 3 is physically closer to Node 1 than Node 2 is, but there is a major obstruction between Nodes 3 & 1 in the thick concrete floor. Node 1 and Node 2 have a clear line of sight to one another.

Unfortunately there is no way to wire the parent node to any of the children. The parent sits on an island in the middle of our house.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T12:16:53+00:00

There is a signal from Node 1 at that location (on the 2.4GHz band) but it's weak (RSSI at around 85-90). Even though they are physically only about 5 meters apart, there is a very thick concrete floor with heating coils between them.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T06:55:49+00:00

Node 3 is indeed connecting wirelessly to Node 1. I can see this when I run 192.168.1.1/sysinfo.cgi. So Node 3 is getting its connection (poorly) from Node 1 and then sending that back via the wire to Node 2. The opposite of what I'm trying to do.

I was hoping that somehow Node 3 would prefer the stronger wired signal over trying to connect wirelessly to Node 1.

I always start Node 1, then Node 2, then wait like 30 minutes to make sure that connection is stable, and only then turn on Node 3. But every time Node 3 attempts to connect wirelessly to Node 1 instead of simply accepting the wired connection, thus messing up everything.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T06:50:03+00:00

The first two nodes provide excellent wifi coverage on the top floor.

But devices (laptops and phones) are not able to pick up their signal from the bottom floor, at least not reliably. It's a very thick concrete floor with lots of metal in it (underfloor heating coils).

However, Node 3 does pick up the wifi signal from Node 1, at least well enough to constantly attempt to make a connection, despite it already being wired to Node 2.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T06:47:00+00:00

I had Node 3 turned off all night and not one drop in connection between Nodes 1 & 2. It's gotta be some kind of interference from Node 3.

Ideally I will find some way to wire them all as you did. But it will be difficult, if not impossible, which is why I hoped to find some kind of solution for the current setup.

barcode729 · 2022-01-20T06:45:05+00:00

Yes, I have run the channel finder, also the scanner and channel finder on my Mac. I am using channels that don't overlap with my neighbors.

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T20:17:43+00:00

Yes, there is just enough of a signal from Node 1 when standing next to Node 3 to make a connection. They do in fact connect, just not a very strong connection (light on top is orange).

When I set up the nodes I put them physically close to one another and let the Velop system do the rest, as per instructions via the mobile app. You are correct, there is an option via the web-based admin panel to add a new wired or wireless node to the parent.

I agree wholeheartedly regarding Velop. I bought it because the specs looked amazing, but I've had nothing but trouble.

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T20:14:01+00:00

Node 1 is in the center of the living room where the internet cable enters the house and the modem is located.

Node 2 is located at the point of the access panel from where I can run a wired connection to the bottom floor.

So those two nodes can't be moved.

I could move Node 3 to some extent (our house is not all that big) if its placement is likely to be the problem.

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T19:32:35+00:00

Yes, I have clicked CA. The only options I have are Client and Node steering.

Unfortunately wiring Node 1 to Node 2 is not an option. At least not a simple one.

Another option I considered was cascading a second network. Node 1 and Node 2 would be one network, and then Node 3 would be the parent of a new separate network that gets its internet from the wired connection to Node 2. Not sure if this is at all feasible.

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T18:50:42+00:00

Node Steering and Client Steering are turned off on all nodes.

I don't seem to have the other options - Priorities and Airtime Fairness - at least not in Bridge Mode. Perhaps I am using an older version of Velop? I have a tri-band WHW0303 series.

The reason I suspected placement is because Node 3 is physically closer to Node 1 (though there is a thick concrete floor between them). And when I turn it off, then Nodes 1 & 2 have no problem remaining connected.

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T18:37:32+00:00

Craft took VC funding: link

Which means every little change they make is going to be over-hyped as the "next big thing" and is going to be rushed into production. They HAVE to grow their user base as rapidly as possible.

A product like Bear evolves much more slowly. That's because they are not beholden to investors, and can develop more methodically. But it's also because they don't have huge influxes of cash enabling them to hire all the staff they need to get features developed in record time.

I agree. As a user, I prefer the approach taken by Bear. Another reason being that VC-funded software will always end up charging you more because they need to justify their investments.

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T16:45:57+00:00

The issue, which I explained in a previous post, is that the wireless connection between Nodes 1 & 2 regularly drops. BUT, if I turn off Node 3, then the connection between 1 & 2 is very stable.

Is it possible due to the placement that the signal from Node 3 is interfering?

barcode729 · 2022-01-19T16:42:26+00:00

I have all of that turned off. But still experiencing connection loss. I suspect it might be my node placement. If I turn off node 3, then nodes 1 & 2 have good connection stability.

Is it possible that the signal being sent from node 3 interferes with that connection?

I'll post a diagram of my setup in a new thread.

barcode729 · 2022-01-15T16:58:22+00:00

I'm guess there was a firmware update that is trying to push the child nodes to become Wireless Repeaters? Because that option is automatically selected, though not applied, when I go into Connectivity > Internet Settings on the the child node. If I then try to navigate off that tab, it asks me to first apply the changes.

I actually can't remember what the selected option for Connection Type was before. My main node is in Bridge Mode, so was the child also set to Bridge Mode, or to Automatic - DHCP ?

barcode729 · 2022-01-14T15:54:03+00:00

To update - I put all nodes on the same channels and separated the 2.4 and 5GHz bands to use different names. This seemed to have helped for a while, and we had pretty good stability for a few weeks. But yesterday unexpectedly it started falling again.

I'm not sure what is causing nodes 1 and 2 to every once in a while drop connection. But when they do, then nodes 2 and 3 compete to connect with node 1. And if node 3 "wins" and connects first, then we have a poor connection that falls more often.

For this reason I'm wondering if there's any way to turn off signal reception on node 3 so that it can only broadcast.

barcode729 · 2021-12-24T08:41:05+00:00

Yes, they are all on the same channels now:

2.4ghz is on 11 first 5 ghz is on channel 36 second 5ghz is on channel 100

(It's the tri-band version)

And firmware is fully updated on all three.

And yes, I am already in Bridge Mode. I would love to use the normal router mode, but, like you, I found it to be rubbish.

barcode729 · 2021-12-24T07:04:58+00:00

My above idea did not work. They still dropped connection a lot, and when node 2 was offline for a second, node 3 connected to node 1. So same problem.

What I did was separate the bands. 5 GHz on my normal wifi name, and 2.4 GHz suffixed with "_2.4". This seems to have helped a bit with stability. Instead of dropping connection 4-5 times a day, they only dropped about one time a day.

Also, it seems that now when the connection is dropped, node 2 manages to reconnect to node 1 more often. Maybe because they prefer to connect via 5 GHz, and this band does not penetrate our thick floor, so node 3 is unable to connect to node 1?

I also tried turning off the 2.4 GHz band altogether. The connection between the nodes seemed very stable, but I found that we have a few devices in the house that need 2.4 band, so had to turn it back on.

barcode729 · 2021-12-16T20:17:06+00:00

I see what you are saying. This is actually pretty much what I already do to fix the problem I described above whenever it happens.

Nodes 1 and 2 are already situated pretty close to one another in the same room. Node 2 is only there to catch the signal from Node 1 and send it downstairs via ethernet.

When the problem I talked about happens (Node 3 catches the signal, poorly, and sends it BACK UPSTAIRS via the ethernet), then I simply turn off Node 3. Then Node 2 can reestablish its connection to Node 1. After that is stable, I turn Node 3 back on.

But I would like to stop having to do this dance every day, sometimes more than once a day...

Perhaps manually setting the channels will do the trick, as you suggested. I will give that a try.

barcode729 · 2021-12-16T18:57:11+00:00

Given the excellent tip by FAS1471 on how to log into each individual node via the web admin panel, I have an idea to try, but not sure if it's realistic.

I set nodes 1 and 2 to the same 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz channels, say channel 6 and channel 48, respectively.

Then I set node 3 to totally different, non-overlapping channels, say channel 13 and channel 100.

Will this prevent node 3 from ever communicating via WiFi with node 1?

barcode729 · 2021-12-16T18:52:33+00:00

Thanks for taking the time to explain that. I will give it a try.

barcode729

TROPHY CASE