#Mesh #WiFi #System #Solid #RealWorld #Tips
You must have heard of “mesh,” “Wi-Fi system,” or “mesh Wi-Fi system,” and might even have some idea of what they are. Well, they practically refer to the same thing, and this post is a lot more than just semantics.
It’ll explain this type of Wi-Fi solution in simple terms and offer tips on how to build an optimal one for your home. Sometimes, the little things mentioned here can make a big difference.
Similar to getting a single router, only you would know which mesh Wi-Fi system fits you best—no “expert” can decide that for you from afar, and there’s no one-size-fits-all Wi-Fi solution. You’re here because you wanted to be pointed in the right direction.
Tip
There is no such thing as the “best” routers or Wi-Fi systems for a particular Internet service provider or type—Fiber-optic, Cable, or whatever.
Any standard router, including the primary unit of a mesh Wi-Fi system, will work at its full potential with any standard Internet broadband terminal device—modem, Fiber-optic ONT, or others. That’s true as long as the two can connect via a network cable, which is almost always the case.
Compatibility is generally applicable only between a terminal device and the ISP. For example, certain modems or gateways work with Comcast Xfinity, while others might not.
In relatively rare non-standard cases, some Fiber-optic lines might require a router that supports VLAN tagging (a.k.a IPTV). The majority of Wi-Fi 6 and newer routers support this.
Dong’s note: I originally published this piece on April 28, 2018, and updated it with up-to-date information on October 27, 2025.
Mesh Wi-Fi systems: It’s more than lumping a bunch of access points together
A Wi-Fi connection has two ends: the transmitter and the receiver. While all Wi-Fi devices can do both—they are transceivers—they can do only one at a time in a given connection, since Wi-Fi is half-duplex.
Network connection: Wi-Fi vs. Wired
- Wi-Fi: Partial bandwidth and always half-duplex. Data moves in one direction at a time using a portion of a band (spectrum) called a channel. Half-duplex is like the walkie-talkie in voice communication.
- Wired (Ethernet):
- Networking cables: Full bandwidth and (generally) full-duplex. Data travels using the entire cable’s bandwidth and in both directions simultaneously. Full-duplex is similar to a phone call in voice communication.
- MoCA: Likely half-duplex, depending on the standard, but with comparable speed and reliability to network cables of the same port grade.
- Powerline: Always half-duplex with very slow real-world speed, heavily susceptible to interference by plugged-in appliances.
Wi-Fi is super convenient, but it’s only relevant when operating on top of a reliable and speedy wired connection via network cables. Within an applicable distance, Wi-Fi is much better than Powerline.
A single Wi-Fi access point (standalone or integrated into a Wi-Fi router) can host multiple Wi-Fi devices (clients), such as computers or smartphones. (That’s generally the case with the infrastructure configuration.)
In a mesh Wi-Fi system, multiple Wi-Fi access points are used together via a centrally managed solution to form a unified Wi-Fi network. Generally, management is at the primary unit of the system (often the router). This unit handles routing, network settings/features, and Internet connectivity, while the rest of the access points act as satellites to expand the network’s coverage.
Different vendors refer to these Wi-Fi “host” units by different names, such as access points, base stations, mesh nodes, satellites, hubs, mesh points, Wi-Fi points, routers, etc. No matter how you call them, if they are linked back and can be managed via the primary router or a central controller, then you have a mesh Wi-Fi system. For the rest of this post, I’ll call them “access points” or “Wi-Fi units”.
The “mesh” concept has existed since the beginning of Wi-Fi to convey that multiple access points are linked wirelessly. This concept didn’t become popular with general consumers until February 2016, when a then-boutique company named eero (all lowercase) announced the original eero Wi-Fi system. Since then, there’s been a boom in home mesh options, and the rest is history.
Nowadays, using network cables (wired) to link the access points in a system is commonplace and has proven to be the only way to get the best performance, as described below. You can use most systems in a wired or wireless setup, with only the latter being true to the original idea of “mesh”.
That said, nowadays, semantically, it’s better to use the term “Wi-Fi system,” which is broader and doesn’t hurt anyone’s feelings. Still, keep in mind that “mesh” doesn’t necessarily mean “wireless”. In any case, let’s take a closer look at this important link between these hardware units, the backhaul.
Mesh Wi-Fi system: Backhaul (wired and wireless) vs. fronthaul
When you use multiple Wi-Fi access points—in a mesh Wi-Fi system or a combo of a Wi-Fi router and an extender—there are two types of connections: fronthaul and backhaul.
Fronthaul is the Wi-Fi signals broadcast outward for clients or the local area network (LAN) ports for wired devices. It’s what we generally expect from a Wi-Fi broadcaster.
Backhaul (a.k.a. backbone), on the other hand, is the link between a Wi-Fi satellite unit and the network’s primary router, or between satellite units.
This link works behind the scenes to keep the hardware units together as a system. It also determines the ceiling bandwidth (and speed) of all devices connected to the particular Wi-Fi satellite unit.
- Hardware of Wi-Fi 6e, Wi-Fi 6, or Wi-Fi 5 standards uses one of its bands (2.4GHz, 5GHz, or 6GHz) for the uplink. In this case:
- When a Wi-Fi band handles backhaul and fronthaul simultaneously, only half its bandwidth is available to either end.
- When a Wi-Fi band functions solely for backhauling, often available traditional Tri-band hardware, it’s called the dedicated backhaul.
- Most Wi-Fi 7 satellite units can use multiple bands for the backhaul link thanks to the MLO feature.
For the best performance and reliability, network cables are recommended for backhauling—wired backhauling, which is an advantage of mesh Wi-Fi hardware with network ports. In this case, a Wi-Fi satellite unit can use its entire Wi-Fi bandwidth for the fronthaul.
Let’s dig a bit deeper into why wireless uplink is generally not a good idea.
Signal loss: The biggest drawback of wireless uplink
There’s always signal degradation due to distance or interference when using wireless uplink (wireless backhaul). And if you use dual-band (or Tri-band Wi-Fi 6E) hardware, there’s also a phenomenon I’d call signal loss.
That’s when a satellite access point uses a band to simultaneously receive and rebroadcast Wi-Fi signals. Because the band has to do two things simultaneously, it can have at most 50 percent of its bandwidth on either end.
For example, the ASUS RP-AX56, a dual-stream (2×2) AX1800 access point, has up to 1200Mbps on the 5GHz band and 600Mbps on the 2.4GHz band. In a wireless setup—as a standard extender or an AiMesh mesh satellite—there are two scenarios:
- The 5GHz band serves as the backhaul: Half of its bandwidth is used for the backhaul link, delivering a theoretical fronthaul ceiling of up to 600Mbps. The 2.4GHz clients can enjoy the full 600Mbps bandwidth.
- When the 2.4GHz band is used for backhaul, half its bandwidth (300Mbps) is used for backhauling and shared among all clients connected to both bands.
The speed numbers above are theoretical. In real-world usage, the actual sustained rates will be markedly lower due to distance, interference, and additional overhead.
The 6GHz band and Mesh Wi-Fi
The 6GHz band, available in Wi-Fi 6e and Wi-Fi 7, has an inherently short range and is generally not suitable for backhaul links. Wi-Fi 7 has the AFC feature that extends the range of this band, but it’s not available in all regions, and where it is, it’s subject to local regulations.
That said, in a wireless backhaul setup, the 5GHz band has been and will be the mainstay.
To combat signal loss, networking vendors use Wi-Fi 5 and Wi-Fi 6 hardware with an additional 5GHz band (5GHz + 5GHz + 2.4GHz). NETGEAR is the pioneer on this front with its Orbi product line, which dedicates the second 5 GHz band to backhauling. This type of dedicated backhaul allows the other two bands to focus on serving clients.
With Wi-Fi 7, the MLO feature significantly increases the wireless backhaul bandwidth. Still, wireless signals always degrade over distance and are hindered by physical objects. As a result, wired backhauling is always the best approach to a well-performing Wi-Fi system.
The point is that, using a system in a fully wireless setup—as a true “mesh”—means you have to deal with temperamental Wi-Fi signals, though setting it up correctly will help.
When do you need a mesh Wi-Fi system?
Generally, to avoid interference, it’s best to have just one Wi-Fi access point—in a home or office, that’s typically the one inside a Wi-Fi router. Place it near the center of the property to make sure it delivers the best coverage.
It’s only when a single Wi-Fi unit isn’t enough that we need more access points, and that’s when a Wi-Fi system is applicable.
It’s important to note that, when it comes to Wi-Fi, more hardware is not necessarily better. A Wi-Fi system is not an upgrade to a single access point in terms of performance—it’s a necessary alternative in signal coverage. Beyond that, a Wi-Fi system doesn’t solve any problems you might have with a single router of the same specs and features. Additionally, using multiple Wi-Fi access points too close to one another can be problematic.
It’s hard to say precisely when a Wi-Fi system is needed. But generally, if your place is airy and around 1800 ft2 (167 m2), you probably only need a single access point. In this case, a standalone Wi-Fi router placed at or near the center is better than getting a Wi-Fi system.
Wi-Fi range in brief
Wi-Fi range in theory: It’s “clean” and generous
The way radio signals work is that the lower the frequency, the longer the wave can travel. AM and FM radios use frequencies measured in kilohertz and megahertz—you can listen to the same station in a vast area, like an entire region or a city.
Wi-Fi uses 2.4GHz, 5GHz, and 6GHz frequencies—all of which are incredibly high. As a result, it has much shorter ranges than radios. That’s especially true when considering that the broadcasting power of Wi-Fi broadcasters is limited by regulations.
But, regardless of Wi-Fi standards, these bands generally share the following: The higher the frequencies (in Hz), the higher the bandwidth (speeds), the shorter the ranges, and the more bandwidth progressively lost over increasing distance.
Generally, physically larger Wi-Fi broadcasters tend to have better ranges than smaller ones—they use all the allowed broadcasting power and have enough processing power to deliver the most bandwidth at the far end of the signal. Still, it’s impossible to accurately determine each’s actual coverage because it fluctuates wildly and depends heavily on the environment.
That said, here are my estimates of a home Wi-Fi broadcaster’s ranges in the best-case scenario, specifically:
- Outdoor environment
- On a sunny day
- No interference or broadcasters in close proximity
- Maximum broadcasting power (30 dBm)
- 2.4GHz: This band has the best range, up to 200 ft (≈ 60 m). However, it is the most popular band also used by non-Wi-Fi devices like cordless phones or TV remotes. Its real-world speeds suffer severely from interference and other factors. As a result, for years, this band has been considered a backup, applicable when range is more important than speed.
- 5GHz: This band has much faster speeds than the 2.4GHz band but shorter ranges, maxing out at around 150 ft (≈ 45 m).
- 6GHz: This is the latest band available. Two things to keep in mind:
- Wi-Fi 6E: The first standard supporting this band, which shares the same ceiling speed as the 5GHz. However, thanks to the less interference and overheads, its actual real-world rate is faster. In return, due to the higher frequency, it has just about 70% of the range, which maxes out at approximately 115 ft (≈ 35m).
- Wi-Fi 7: This is the latest standard where the 6GHz band’s channel width (and bandwidth) is doubled. Additionally, with a broadcaster that supports AFC, such as the Ubiquiti E7, this band gets a boost in broadcasting power to deliver the same range as that of the 5GHz.
Wi-Fi range in real life: The devil is in the little and big details
In real-world usage, Wi-Fi broadcasters in the same frequency band and broadcasting power generally deliver the same coverage. Specifically, they are all the same if you measure the signal reach alone.
What differentiates them is their sustained speeds and signal stability, or how the quality of their Wi-Fi signals changes as you increase the distance. And that generally varies from one model or Wi-Fi standard to another.
Your router’s Wi-Fi range is always much shorter than the theoretical number mentioned above. That’s because Wi-Fi signals are sensitive to interference and obstacles.
While the Wi-Fi range doesn’t depend on the channel width, the wider the channel and the higher the frequency, the less stable it becomes. It’s more susceptible to interference and obstacles, and its range is more acutely hindered. So, within the same standard, more bandwidth generally equals higher fragility.
Below are the items that will affect Wi-Fi ranges.
Common 2.4 GHz interference sources: Impossible to measure
- Other 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi broadcasters in the vicinity
- 2.4GHz cordless phones and other appliances
- Fluorescent bulbs
- Bluetooth devices
- Microwave ovens
Common 5 GHz interference sources: Impossible to measure
- Other nearby 5GHz Wi-Fi broadcasters
- 5GHz cordless telephones and other appliances
- Radars
- Digital satellites
Common signal blockage for all Wi-Fi bands: Measurable, albeit challenging, walls and large objects
Physical objects, such as appliances or elevators, hinder all Wi-Fi bands. However, walls are the most problematic obstacle since they are everywhere. Different types of wall blocks Wi-Fi signals differently, but no wall is good for Wi-Fi.
Here are my rough real-life estimations of how much a wall blocks Wi-Fi signals—generally use the low number for the 2.4GHz and the high one for the 5GHz, add another 10%-15% to the 5GHz for the 6GHz band:
- A thin, porous wall (wood, sheetrock, drywall, etc.) will block between 5% and 30% of Wi-Fi signals—a router’s range will be much shorter when placed next to it.
- A thick porous wall: 20% to 40%.
- A thin nonporous wall (concrete, metal, ceramic tile, brick with mortar, etc.): 30% to 50%.
- A thick nonporous wall: 50% to 90%.
Again, these numbers are just ballpark, but you can use them to know how far the signal will reach when you place a Wi-Fi broadcaster at a specific spot in your home. A simple rule is that more walls equal worse coverage, and generally, a single wall will reduce the signal by approximately 30%.
That said, in real life, when all adverse elements are taken into account, and depending on the situation and where you stand from the broadcaster, we need to discount the theoretical ranges mentioned above between 40% and 90% to get a broadcaster’s realistic coverage.
When a single access point or your lone Wi-Fi router doesn’t provide sufficient coverage, it’s time to consider adding more Wi-Fi satellite units.
Mesh system vs. individual extenders or access points
It’s important to note that having multiple access points in a network doesn’t necessarily mean you have a mesh Wi-Fi system. As mentioned above, that’s because:
A mesh Wi-Fi system consists of multiple Wi-Fi broadcasters that work together and can be managed from a single location, such as the router unit or a controller. That’s not automatically the case when you use a few standalone Wi-Fi extenders or access points. You have to use the hardware designed to work together.
That said, in a system with wireless backhauling, each satellite unit is essentially a centrally managed Wi-Fi extender. Similarly, in a mesh with wired backhauling, each satellite unit is essentially a centrally managed access point.
The most significant difference between a Wi-Fi system vs. using multiple individually managed Wi-Fi units is that the former gives you better ease of use, low (or no) interference between broadcasters, and seamless handoff, while the latter doesn’t.
Specifically, two things to note:
- Standalone extenders are quick-and-dirty fixes that work only to some extent, but your network will likely break when you change your Wi-Fi settings (SSID, password, and so on).
- Access points always deliver better performance than extenders or wireless mesh satellites of the same Wi-Fi grade, thanks to the wired backhauling.
The table below provides a general idea of when you should use a mesh Wi-Fi system vs. other non-mesh hardware, such as independent extenders or access points.
| Overall Grade |
Speed (at the router) |
Speed (at satellite) |
Seemless handoff |
Top Applicable Broadband Speed (real-world performance) |
Note | |
| Mesh Wi-Fi system with Multi-Gig wired backhauling | Ultimate | Gigabit or faster | Gigabit or faster | Yes | Multi-Gigabit | Generally, a Gigabit is the top speed |
| Mesh Wi-Fi system with Gigabit wired backhauling | Best | Gigabit or faster | Gigabit at most | Yes | Gigabit | Performance is decided by port grade; Can be a real mesh system with certain hardware |
| Router + Standard Access point | Good | Gigabit or faster | Gigabit or faster | Maybe | Gigabit and faster | Performance is decided by port grade. Can be a real mesh system with certain hardware |
| Mesh Wi-Fi system with mixed wired and wireless backhauling | OK to Good | Gigabit or faster | depend on the backhaul | Yes | Gigabit | Slow performance at the wireless satellite |
| Mesh Wi-Fi system with wireless backhauling (true mesh) |
OK | Gigabit or faster | Sub-Gigabit or slower; Potentially 50% signal loss; Performance at satellites depends heavily on the backhaul range |
Yes | ≈500Mbps or slower | Slow performance overall |
| Performance is decided by port grade. Can be a real mesh system with specific hardware |
Bad | Gigabit or faster | Sub-Gigabit or slower; 50% signal loss |
No | ≈150Mbps or slower | Slow performance; Hard to manage; Potentially unreliable |
The access point mode of a mesh Wi-Fi system
The access point mode can apply to more than a single hardware unit.
In many Wi-Fi (mesh) systems, you can put the primary unit (the router) into access point mode. In this mode, the entire system extends the network hosted by another router while still allowing you to manage the Wi-Fi settings of all mesh nodes via the primary unit’s management interface.
However, this AP-mode-as-a-system is not available in all brands of Wi-Fi systems. Some canned systems, such as Google Nest Wifi, only have this AP mode when you use each hardware unit individually. Among advanced DIY Wi-Fi mesh system approaches, UniFi is an example that doesn’t support the AP mode.
Mesh Wi-Fi systems: Purpose-built vs. DIY
When it comes to getting a mesh Wi-Fi system, there are two main options. The first and easiest is to get a purpose-built, a.k.a. canned system, from one of the most popular brands below.
Generally, canned systems are easy to use and made primarily for a fully wireless setup. They don’t offer much customization and are made for those who don’t want to spend time making the most of their network.
Left: The TP-Link Deco BE63 purpose-built mesh system.
Right: A combo of a UniFi router plus a few UniFi access points will make an ultimate Wi-Fi system.
The second option is a do-it-yourself (DIY) system that can be tailored to specific situations. With these, you can start with a single router, even a non-Wi-Fi one, and then add (more) Wi-Fi access points that best fit the layout of your home.
Below are the top five DIY mesh systems if you’re in a hurry. If not, check out this post on buying a home system for more details.
Mesh Wi-Fi system: The benefits
Using a real mesh Wi-Fi system has many advantages over lumping a bunch of individually-managed Wi-Fi units together. Specifically, there are three main things to gain from a Wi-Fi system:
1. Ease of use
A Wi-Fi system is generally easy to set up. At most, you only need to set up the primary node (the router). After that, the rest of the satellite will replicate the Wi-Fi settings and expand the coverage.
That’s the case in the ongoing management, too. For example, you only have to do that on the router unit when changing Wi-Fi settings, such as the network name (SSID) or password. The system will automatically apply that to the satellites.
2. Seamless handoff
In a mesh, it’s easier to maintain continuous connectivity on your device when roaming from one access point another, as if there were just one.
Specifically, as you roam around within a mesh’s Wi-Fi coverage, the device in your hand will automatically switch to the access point with the best signal. Additionally, signals from one mesh unit don’t adversely interfere with those of another.
By the way, signal handoff works on a band-by-band basis and doesn’t require Smart Connect, which treats all bands as a single network (SSID).
The seamless handoff also applies when two or more satellites are in a wireless setup. In this case, a satellite will automatically select which other satellite or the primary router to use for the backhaul link, depending on real-time conditions.
Notes on the seamless handoff
It’s essential not to take seamless literally. That doesn’t exist.
Physically, the client needs to disconnect itself from one access point and move to another, and there’s always a brief interruption during the process—it’s a matter of how quickly. It’s seamless when it happens so fast that you don’t notice it.
Generally, you will notice the interruption when using real-time communication apps, such as Wi-Fi calling or video conferencing. To avoid that, pick a location with solid signals and stay there.
However, if you stream a video or do general web surfing, file downloading, etc. The transition can appear seamless.
Here are a few things to keep in mind about handoff:
- For a seamless handoff to work, the hardware devices on both sides (access points and clients) must support IEEE 802.11r, 802.11v, or 802.11k.
- Most Wi-Fi systems and clients support at least one of the standards above, but there’s a chance they don’t use the same one, so a seamless handoff isn’t guaranteed. In any case, turning Wi-Fi off and back on, or disconnecting and then reconnecting to the SSID, is the sure way for the client to connect to the best mesh Wi-Fi units.
- It’s the speed that matters. If your connection is fast enough for your task, there’s no need to worry about which access point your device connects to.
- Wi-Fi doesn’t follow human logic when it comes to distances. Within a specific range where signals are consistently strong (or weak) to a certain extent, devices might not see any difference between closer or farther access points.
- The oversensitive handoff is not a good thing. Constant jumping between access points will cause unstable connectivity.
In my experience, after testing hundreds of hardware devices, the seamless handoff is almost always hit-or-miss. It varies depending on your existing router, clients, and other factors. Many mobile devices—especially those from Apple—generally lack seamless handoff support.
Mesh hardware often uses the connection speed as the basis for the hand-off.
Specifically, a client would consider jumping from one broadcaster to another only when the connection speed between it and the current broadcaster is no longer fast enough for its general bandwidth needs.
Depending on the situation and varying by hardware or Wi-Fi standard, this threshold can be very low, like 50Mbps, because most clients generally don’t need more than that in real-world usage. That’s why, in certain situations, devices appear more clingy to a far mesh node—their connection speeds haven’t reached the threshold required for the jump yet.
3. Better performance
All the Wi-Fi units in a Wi-Fi system work together as a single unified network. As a result, they leverage each other’s Wi-Fi signals to achieve greater efficiency rather than working independently.
For this reason, multiple wireless mesh satellites generally have better performance and reliability than using extenders of the same Wi-Fi grade at the exact locations.
Still, wireless backhauling is temperamental, and using network cables to link the Wi-Fi units—wired backhauling—is the best way to build a well-performing mesh Wi-Fi system.
Left: These two ASUS routers can form an AiMesh system.
Right: The UDR7 and UX7 are an excellent combo for a robust UniFi mesh wi-Fi system.
The takeaway
A mesh is much more than using a few extenders or access points in your network. The hardware pieces need to work together in a centrally managed system via the primary router or a controller to deliver a seamless network.
It’s worth noting that a mesh Wi-Fi system is not meant to be an upgrade to a single router—it’s a necessary alternative in terms of signal coverage.
Finally, when it comes to building a mesh, getting your home wired is the best approach. That’s the only way to simplify and figure-proof your tech and enjoy the true speed of Wi-Fi 7.
For more information on mesh networks, including tips on building your own, check out the tips on how to set up a mesh system and other related posts.
Recent Comments