Table of Contents

How many APs do I need?

It depends, and there are a few variables to consider. You’ll never get an exact answer, but you can get a good estimate by considering how much area you are covering, what equipment you’re using, and what level of performance you want.

If all you need is a basic connection, a single AP can cover several thousand square feet. If you want a high performance network over a large area, things get trickier. Things like building materials, floor layout, how many Wi-Fi networks are around you all matter. It’s never as simple as throwing more APs at the problem.

For a small home or apartment, a single AP is usually all you need. 2 or 3 access points will cover most medium-sized homes well. My house has two stories and a 36x20 foot floor plan. For me, one access point per floor is enough. This gives me consistent 5 GHz coverage over my whole house. Larger homes or bigger buildings may require more APs per floor, but it's easy to overestimate how many you need.

The best way to determine the number of APs you need is to gather some data and do some testing. If you’re able to install an access point and walk around with a Wi-Fi analyzer app, you can determine where APs should be placed, and how many you need. You want to watch for areas that dip below -70 to -75 dBm. That usually means you are too far away from your access point, and adding one may help.

What is the best mesh system you’ve tested?

It’s impossible to pick a single “best” mesh system. Everything has tradeoffs and not everyone needs the same performance or has the same budget. As briefly as possible:

Low-cost with a good basic app: TP-Link Deco. I like the Deco X60 in particular. The older Wi-Fi 5 models like the Deco M5 are still good, especially for slower Internet connections.

Easiest to use: Eero. I like the Eero 6 the most, but like with Deco, the older Wi-Fi 5 Eero models are more than enough for a basic home network. If price is the most important factor the older Wi-Fi 5 kits are still very good.

Highest performance: Linksys Velop and Netgear Orbi both offer the best coverage and speeds that I’ve tested. The Wi-Fi 6E Velop Atlas Max offers a bit more, but it’s also absurdly priced at over $1200. The Orbi RBK852 and Velop AX5200 offer a better balance of price to performance. They both have apps that are very basic, so if networking features are important check out my reviews of those models first.

How does Mesh compare with UniFi or Aruba Instant On?

The term “mesh” can be used a few different ways. I like to refer to it as wireless backhaul. All this means is that the AP doesn’t have an Ethernet connection to the network, and it communicates with another AP wirelessly. That’s usually what home “mesh” systems like Eero or Velop are good at. They are designed to easily setup a multiple AP network without Ethernet.

No matter what system you’re using, Ethernet is going to beat out wireless backhaul. Always run Ethernet if you can. Ethernet matters more than brand or model in most cases.

Aruba Instant On and UniFi offer more control over the network than a typical mesh system. Instant On has limited settings, but UniFi offers significantly more. You’ll have full control of your settings and how they handle roaming and band steering. If you want that control, these kind of systems are great, as long as you know how to set them up properly. If you want something that’s easier to use, a mesh system like Eero would be the better option. Mesh systems usually don’t let you control those settings, but they usually do a good job by default.

Either way, if you run Ethernet to all of the APs it should perform well. The difference between Eero and Velop, or Aruba and UniFi is more about how much control you want over the network and the settings.

Should I use a dual-band SSID or separate 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz networks?

They both have tradeoffs, but I prefer dual-band SSIDs. This allows my devices to roam between 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz automatically. If you want manual control over which devices are on each band, separate SSIDs are the best way. I prefer roaming without manually changing networks, but dual-band SSIDs can be harder to manage.

If you have multiple APs, AP placement and settings make a bigger difference. 5 GHz is faster, but the signal quickly drops off as it goes through walls and obstructions. 2.4 GHz is slower, but it penetrates walls better and has roughly twice the range. Bad roaming behavior is usually caused by devices staying connected to an AP further away, or refusing to roam off of 2.4 GHz. You’ll get the best results from a dual-band SSID by balancing the two. Mesh systems usually do this automatically. With something like UniFi you can improve roaming behavior by tuning transmit power levels, or with band steering.

To equalize the range difference, I typically configure 5 GHz radios at a high power level, and 2.4 GHz at a medium or low power level. This limits an AP’s range, but it also encourages devices to use 5 GHz instead. This usually results in better roaming behavior without the need for band steering. Band steering tries to force devices to connect to 5 GHz but it can also cause issues, especially with older Wi-Fi devices. Band steering may be necessary in your network with your devices, but it isn’t in mine. I’d recommend turning down 2.4 GHz power levels first.

Do I need Band Steering?

With most Wi-Fi systems, band steering is off by default. I usually leave it that way. There are times when it helps, and times when it hurts. It depends on the network and the devices using it. In general newer devices handle it fine, but older or 2.4 GHz-only clients can have issues joining the network. It’s less of a problem now than it used to be.

Band steering works by ignoring probe requests on 2.4 GHz unless that’s all the client supports. It’s a way to trick devices into using 5 GHz instead. Meraki has a good post which goes into more details on band steering.

You don’t need to lean on band steering if you have separate 2.4 and 5 GHz networks. If you’re using a dual-band SSID, band steering might be useful. I get good roaming behavior from leaving it off and lowering the transmit power of my 2.4 GHz radios. There’s nothing wrong with separating the bands or turning band steering on if that’s what works for you, but I’ve found that I don’t need to.

Can I convert an enterprise Aruba AP to Instant On?

No, at least not officially. The split between the enterprise “Instant” APs and the Instant On ecosystem is a little tricky. Aruba’s Instant On APs share a lot of their underlying hardware with the enterprise APs, but they are totally separate and cannot be used interchangeably. You cannot run InstantOS or ArubaOS on an Instant On AP, and you can’t use the Instant On portal with their enterprise APs.

With the enterprise APs, you have two options for an OS and how you control it. The normal method is to use a WLAN controller with many APs, in a typical campus WLAN. This would be using the ArubaOS image, and you’d control the AP with Aruba Central or an Aruba WLAN controller.

You can also deploy Aruba Enterprise APs with the Instant OS firmware, allowing the AP itself to act as a virtual controller. That’s probably what you want in a smaller environment like a home network. The AP would act as what Aruba calls an “IAP” or Instant AP. The AP runs a limited version of the controller software, allowing you to control a cluster of APs by setting the SSID, PSK, etc.

There is more nuance to it, but that’s the general idea. See if you can get an InstantOS firmware, which you’ll need to get through the proper channels. If you have an Aruba account, the AP should be licensed and you should be able to get the firmware through the Aruba website. I’m not sure on the specifics because I’ve never had to do that.

How does the Linksys Velop AX5400 compare with the AX5300 and AX4200?

In general the differences between AX5400, AX5300 and AX4200 are not that big. Velop’s product names are awful, and it makes it hard to compare them. To be clear:

• Atlas Pro 6 = AX5400, dual-band.
• MX5 or MX10 kits = AX5300, tri-band
• MX4200 or MX12600 kits = AX4200, tri-band.

The Atlas Pro 6 is poorly named in my opinion. It offers a slightly higher number because it supports 160 MHz channels, but the other models will work better in the real world. I would recommend either of the tri-band models instead, and the AX5300 and AX4200 are the more interesting ones to compare.

The AX5300 just offers a bit more than the AX4200. They are the same size (which is huge!), but the AX5300 has one more gigabit LAN port, a bit more RAM, a bit more CPU power, and a bit more potential Wi-Fi speed. They’re both tri-band, and they will both allow you to spread a fast Internet connection over a large house. Ethernet will always win, but these are some of the most powerful mesh systems you can buy, unless you want to spend significantly more on something like the Atlas Max 6E.

The biggest difference is the AX4200 doesn’t support Wi-Fi 6 in 2.4 GHz, and one of the two 5 GHz radios. That’s why you see 600 Mbps for 2.4 GHz (4x4 Wi-Fi 4), and 1733 Mbps (3x3 Wi-Fi 5) for the slower 5 GHz radio. The AX5300 supports Wi-Fi 6 across all three radios.

I’d recommend the AX4200 unless those few differences matter to you. In real world performance the gap isn’t as big as the price difference. You might see slightly higher speed test results on the AX5300, but the AX4200 is more than enough for most home networks.

The “Pro” AX5400 model only has two radios, so it won’t be able to push more than 300 Mbps over wireless backhaul in most cases. The tri-band models will be able to push a bit more. Unless you see the pro model on sale, I’d avoid it. There are better, cheaper dual-band mesh kits out there like the Eero 6 or Deco X60.

I don’t have a lot of positive things to say about the Velop app or their software features, but they are very impressive when it comes to Wi-Fi coverage and speed. If that’s what you’re after, Velop is a decent option. Netgear Orbi is another. Orbi is a lot like Velop in my experience -- it has a basic app, not a lot of features, but very strong Wi-Fi coverage and speed.

Which is better for a 500 Mbps Internet connection in a 3000 square feet home, Eero 6 or Eero 6 Pro?

The Eero 6 and Eero 6 Pro both offer Wi-Fi 6, and are good for houses which don’t have Ethernet cabling. If you have an Internet connection that is 300 Mbps or below, the Eero 6 is all you need. If you have a faster Internet connection or need to cover more area, the Eero 6 Pro is the better option.

All mesh systems should be connected to Ethernet if possible. This allows them to spread a fast Internet connection further, and gives them better performance overall. Most people considering a mesh system do not have Ethernet available though. If you don’t have Ethernet cabling, you’re going to be restricted to around 400-500 Mbps under the best of circumstances, especially when you’re not connected to the main gateway node. The main gateway node is the one that has an Ethernet cable to your Internet connection.

Since I’m assuming Ethernet between the Eeros is not possible, and 3000 feet is a good amount of cover, I’d recommend the Eero Pro 6 first. That is the device that’s most capable of delivering your 500 Mbps connection and spreading it around the house. As you mentioned, you can mix and match different models of Eeros, but the Eero Pro 6 is the most capable.

The number of Eeros is where things get tricky. What kind of walls do you have? Where does your Internet connection come in? Do you want consistent 5 GHz everywhere? Those are the questions I would ask.

I have a smaller home, it’s around 1500 square feet + a basement. For me, two Eero 6 Pros is more than enough. My floors are around 36 feet by 20 feet wide, and the construction is mostly brick on the exterior, and drywall/sheet rock inside the house. With that size, one Eero per floor is about perfect.

To cover 3000 square feet, you’ll likely want a 3rd. So my top pick for you would be the 3-piece Eero Pro 6 kit. Placement depends on where you Internet connection is sitting. The ideal place for your Internet connection and gateway would be the middle of the 1st floor. Then I’d recommend putting two of the Eero Pro 6’s on the 2nd floor, on either side of the house. If you have a finished basement you can also just do one on each floor.

Generally speaking, you want to make a triangle shape with your Eero’s. The gateway in the middle of the 1st, and two nodes on the far left and right of the 2nd floor would do that. If your Internet connection is in the basement or on the other side of the house, you can do the same thing, but it won’t be as ideal. If you have brick or other masonry walls in the house, that’s going to change things a bit too. Never expect a Wi-Fi access point to provide 5 GHz coverage more than 2 walls and/or 30 feet away. During setup the Eero app will help you with all this, so don’t worry too much. These are general guidelines, you have to put the equipment in place and see how it performs to really know.

Which would provide the better coverage: One Eero 6 pro or two Eero 6 units backhauled via Ethernet?

That depends on what you mean by coverage. Speed? Spread? How much area are you trying to cover?

Generally speaking:

• Two regular Eero 6s with an Ethernet cable between them will give you the broadest coverage, and highest overall speeds over the entire area.
• A big factor for Wi-Fi coverage and speed is how far you are from your AP. With two Eero 6 nodes you’ll cover more area and increase speeds by reducing distance.
• A single Eero Pro 6 will cover more than a single Eero 6, but only by a little bit. The Pro may give you higher speeds when you’re near it, but it won’t be able to match the coverage of two Eero 6’s that are spread out.
• The Pro models have a 3rd radio which is great for wireless backhaul, but won’t be able to match having two Eero 6 APs.

Of those two options, I’d recommend the two Eero 6 nodes with an Ethernet cable between them. I’d only recommend the Pro if you are going to be using wireless backhaul between two or more Eeros and you have a fast Internet connection.