Wireless bridge with POE?

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371
Not sure if I have the terms right but do they make wireless bridges/ "gaming" adapters with POe?
 

MadJuggla9

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
3,515
POE means Power Over Ethernet and is used a lot by ISPs. What is your application? I assume your trying to bypass a DHCP or avoid NAT difficulties.

I use a PicoStation to pick up a signal from my wireless router and I connect it to my switch so that anything plugged into my switch grabs an IP on the same network as my router ... but keeps me from running cable directly from my router (useful for up/down stairs)
 

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371
I'm looking to use an ip camera that only uses Ethernet connection but can't run long cables to te location it's needed at. So my plan was to plug the camera into a wireless bridge that uses poe. While sending and receive data over the wireless to the router
 

MadJuggla9

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
3,515
Yes, this is fairly easy. Ubiquiti makes a fine range of products to do what your looking for. I would recommend a Loco: http://www.ubnt.com/nanostationloco

You set it up to lock onto your router with the usual credentials that a laptop would use and plug the LAN cable into your camera...simple as that.

As for configuring, you set it up in Bridge mode WDS, and assign it a static IP (one in your routers subnet that will not be assigned). For example: my router is 192.168.1.1 so I'd assign 192.168.1.99 to the device with a gateway and DNS of my router.

One tip is to allow your router DHCP clients range from say 192.168.1.100 to 192.168.1.200. That way you know anything you manually assign will be without IP conflict.

The units run about 50-60 bucks.
 

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371
i just need POE to power the camera. the adapter/bridge will be powered normally by the wall.
 

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371


this is what im trying to do. if that makes it any more clearer. i just want to send that data over wireless from the bridge to router. the power brick that bridge would use would be plugged into a normal outlet then cat5 poe ran to the camera. again this is pending that if they make a wireless bridge that does POE injection
 

wizdum

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
1,943


this is what im trying to do. if that makes it any more clearer. i just want to send that data over wireless from the bridge to router. the power brick that bridge would use would be plugged into a normal outlet then cat5 poe ran to the camera. again this is pending that if they make a wireless bridge that does POE injection

What I was trying to say is, if you have power there for the wireless bridge, why not just plug the POE injector for the camera into same outlet?

I think a Ubiquiti Nanostation with a Ubiquiti UniFi Camera is as close as you are going to get for this. The Nanostation has a secondary ethernet port on it that can be set to passthrough mode.

nsm_ip.jpg
 

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371
What I was trying to say is, if you have power there for the wireless bridge, why not just plug the POE injector for the camera into same outlet?

I think a Ubiquiti Nanostation with a Ubiquiti UniFi Camera is as close as you are going to get for this. The Nanostation has a secondary ethernet port on it that can be set to passthrough mode.

nsm_ip.jpg

well reason being i want to run just one cable-cat5. and the distance of the outlet where the bridge will be plugged in is further than the position of the camera.
 

wizdum

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
1,943
well reason being i want to run just one cable-cat5. and the distance of the outlet where the bridge will be plugged in is further than the position of the camera.

Thats what I mean. You take the bridge, run a 6 inch long patch cable from it to the POE injector, and then run how ever many feet of cat5e that you need from the injector to the camera. You could even duct tape the injector to the wireless bridge if you want an all-in-one unit.
 

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371
Oh lol yea that's what I meant. I wanted to see if I can reduce the mess of running the wireless bridge and a seperate poe and have one bridge that does poe
 

MadJuggla9

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
3,515
Oh lol yea that's what I meant. I wanted to see if I can reduce the mess of running the wireless bridge and a seperate poe and have one bridge that does poe

A Nanostation can do passthru POE and still acts like a bridge (same exact configuration as a locostation). Just plug the POE into port 2, and the camera into port 1 and voila power and data to both ports.

If you start trying to want everything in one your going to get over your head in terminology. Keep it simple, you don't want to blow a piece of equipment.

With that said, Make sure to get a POE with extra amperage (same voltage) to account for the second device. This is why I recommended Ubiquiti; They have .5amp POEs and 1amp POEs that covers this purpose.

Here's a good picture filled low word count read: http://wiki.ubnt.com/BeansTalk_PoE_bridge
 

FrostBite

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
1,086
PoE and a wireless bridge are two completely separate matters. PoE means it gets power through an ethernet cable via a router or switch that supports PoE. A wireless bridge is just connecting two routers wirelessly (instead of wired). The "simpliest" way to do this is to find a wireless router that has PoE capabilities (see above hardware recommendations), but expect to pay a bit of a premium since this is a bit of a niche product. The cheapest way is to buy a cheap wireless router and use a PoE injector (or a cheap PoE switch).
 

Nate7311

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 11, 2001
Messages
3,320
The issue with the Ubiquiti devices is their odd POE spec. All of the Nanostation stuff uses 24v POE, not the industry standard 48v POE. the OP is best off with a basic wireless bridge and a cheap POE injector. If you do find something that offers this, it will be FAR more expensive due to niche-market status.
 

antok86

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Feb 26, 2006
Messages
8,371
The issue with the Ubiquiti devices is their odd POE spec. All of the Nanostation stuff uses 24v POE, not the industry standard 48v POE. the OP is best off with a basic wireless bridge and a cheap POE injector. If you do find something that offers this, it will be FAR more expensive due to niche-market status.

Probably have to do it this way. Just thought is ask you all
Thanks for the input
 

wizdum

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
1,943
The issue with the Ubiquiti devices is their odd POE spec. All of the Nanostation stuff uses 24v POE, not the industry standard 48v POE. the OP is best off with a basic wireless bridge and a cheap POE injector. If you do find something that offers this, it will be FAR more expensive due to niche-market status.

Ubiquiti POE is industry standard, you're just in the wrong industry. They primarily make gear for use on towers, where the standard is 24v. 24v is nice because you can string two 12v SLA batteries, or four 6v SLA batteries together, to provide battery backup with minimal loss in tight quarters.

That being said, OP is looking for a single port POE device. The money he/she saves from using Ubiquiti products (which all include POE injectors) will outweigh any potential savings from being able to scale easily later on.

Also, Ubiquiti uses passive POE, you can get injectors off eBay for $5. The licensing for using 802.3af in a product costs more than $5.

A nanostation, two injectors, and a UniFi camera runs about $190 total.
 

Nate7311

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 11, 2001
Messages
3,320
Ubiquiti POE is industry standard, you're just in the wrong industry. They primarily make gear for use on towers, where the standard is 24v. 24v is nice because you can string two 12v SLA batteries, or four 6v SLA batteries together, to provide battery backup with minimal loss in tight quarters.

That being said, OP is looking for a single port POE device. The money he/she saves from using Ubiquiti products (which all include POE injectors) will outweigh any potential savings from being able to scale easily later on.

Also, Ubiquiti uses passive POE, you can get injectors off eBay for $5. The licensing for using 802.3af in a product costs more than $5.

A nanostation, two injectors, and a UniFi camera runs about $190 total.

Fair enough, but the OP alluded to an existing camera, rather than purchasing a new one, negating the compatibility of a 24v POE system. Agreed that 24v is the standard for tower equipment, but until the latest generation of AP's all Ubiquity's indoor devices were 24v in a realm where .af/.at is the standard. Thus the "odd" comment.
 

MadJuggla9

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
3,515
That's what injectors are for. Wizdum is spot on accurate.

If you want to overpay for low range and less features there are alternatives no doubt. With that said, I do this every day with units 300 feet up and 8 mile backhauls used as bridges ... but I don't like to complicate things.
 

wizdum

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
1,943
Fair enough, but the OP alluded to an existing camera, rather than purchasing a new one, negating the compatibility of a 24v POE system. Agreed that 24v is the standard for tower equipment, but until the latest generation of AP's all Ubiquity's indoor devices were 24v in a realm where .af/.at is the standard. Thus the "odd" comment.

I had assumed that OP did not yet have a camera, since he was investigating a method for connecting one to a network. If he/she already has a camera that uses 802.3af, that would be a problem. I can't think of any reason why a company would make a wireless bridge with a single 802.3af POE port. An injector would have to be used.
 

Nate7311

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 11, 2001
Messages
3,320
Wow, we're all full of fight tonight, arent' we? I was agreeing with you guys...
 

MadJuggla9

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 9, 2002
Messages
3,515
Same here. I'm just telling any readers that I do this daily, and it is one of the most cost efficient solutions with added features, ease and able to be device agnostic.

Other ideas brought up are not wrong but they are not made for this application. A wireless bridge is more prone to problems and harder to work with using home equipment. No opinion just fact.
 
Top