# Wireless Internet



## modineg44 (Jun 25, 2002)

Is it possible to have a wireless internet connection with dial-up, or does it have to be high speed? 

My phone jack is so far from where I want to have my computer and I really don't want the hassle of finding someone to install another jack.

Nancy


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

What about just a longer phone cord?
my Wall jack is like 75 feet from my computer I just have a long phone cord running to the wall jack.


----------



## HermitJohn (May 10, 2002)

Yes, look for an older router that has port to allow connection to serial modem. It was intended as backup if your high speed connection went out. Sharing a dialup connection is rather pointless, but if you just want wireless to use with one computer should be just fine.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

You could use a dial up router like this one.

http://cgi.ebay.com/actiontec-dual-...ryZ14920QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

If you have a stationary desktop computer in your home running XP Pro you could use it as a dial up router. Just setup Internet sharing, then share it over a wireless adapter. It's easier than you might think.


----------



## Teresa S. (Mar 2, 2006)

Yes, it IS possible as stated above, to do. However, I did this when I had had dial-up and the end result isn't too great. The SLOW speeds that dial-up delivers on a single pc is horrible its self, but when you SHARE or make that slow dial-up connection wireless, it is 10x worse! I had my dial-up configured to be wireless for two days and that was it!! I went back to a single pc using a single phone line. I soon found out that DSL was available, and am now on DSL COMPLETELY WIRELESS! It's amazingly fast and great! short- it can be done, but I don't reccomend it! If possible switch to DSL or cable and then go wireless!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Teresa S. said:


> Yes, it IS possible as stated above, to do. However, I did this when I had had dial-up and the end result isn't too great. The SLOW speeds that dial-up delivers on a single pc is horrible its self, but when you SHARE or make that slow dial-up connection wireless, it is 10x worse!


Actually, there's a rule of thumb that, on average, three people can share an dialup connection. The idea is that people aren't always bringing in web pages and email. They stop to read web pages and they spend time replying to email. Therefore, the average dialup customer is only using about 1/3 of his available bandwidth.

That said, my experience is that some people don't always behave themselves. I shared a dialup connection with my daughter at one time. Without warning she would decide to download an MP3 at a time when I was trying to load something critical. The lack of communication made sharing a dialup connection with her untenable.

It's all a matter of what people do and the kind of cooperation you get. Many dialup users never download files, so sharing a dialup connection could be reasonable.

Of course, having DSL would avoid those problems altogether, but that's not an option for everyone.


----------



## Gary in ohio (May 11, 2002)

modineg44 said:


> Is it possible to have a wireless internet connection with dial-up, or does it have to be high speed?
> 
> My phone jack is so far from where I want to have my computer and I really don't want the hassle of finding someone to install another jack.
> 
> Nancy


The answer to your question is NO you cant have wireless internet with dialup. With that said YEs you can connect to a dialup router with wifi. You need a dialup routers, rather hard to find now a days and you need a wifi router (or access point). With this you can connect to the internet through your wifi card to a dial up port


----------



## Stann (Jan 2, 2005)

Yes, it can be done. But, it's not a configuration really meant for a PC beginner. Basically, you want to use 2 computers both connected via wireless. The "front-end" computer will also be connected via dialup cable to your Internet connection or ISP, slightly as Nevada and Teresa S. implied. The important part is that you connect the computers over the wireless with a "remote control" program like Symantec pcAnywhere. You won't have the delay problems that were implied by Teresa S., since you will be "remote controlling" your "front-end" computer with your free standing, no-wire computer. It will be basically as fast as your dialup.

http://www.symantec.com/norton/products/overview.jsp?pcid=pf&pvid=pca121

Nevada, don't use the modem "dialup router" that you ebay linked in your post. The seller is misleading in the description. It probably won't work for most current home users since it was meant for the old-style, RAS servers. Most current ISPs, like AOL, Juno, etc., require that you run their proprietary, dialup software. The old-style RAS serves generally used telnet (or equivalent) and usually only required an input of login name, password, and maybe security key.

I feel compelled to post here since most of the above post's info are incorrect.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Stann said:


> Most current ISPs, like AOL, Juno, etc., require that you run their proprietary, dialup software.


While it's true that AOL & Juno require their own software to connect, it's not true that most ISPs operate that way. I operate my own dialup ISP and support both CHAP and PAP authentication with a RADIUS server.

However, to connect a remote computer using a WinXP desktop machine as a wireless router, a standard 56K internal modem in the desktop machine will work fine. No routing hardware is necessary. Also, you WILL NOT need to use software like pcAnywhere. That software is intended for an entirely different purpose anyway (remote desktop operation).

To use a WinXP machine to share wireless Internet, setup Internet sharing according to the following Microsoft tutorial, but simply share it out of a wireless network adapter instead of a wired network adapter.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/306126

All necessary software for sharing wireless Internet with an XP machine is included with WinXP. The only necessary hardware will be a 56K modem and a wireless network adapter.

Honestly, no one minds your posting here but make sure you know what you're talking about before giving advice, particularly when you consider accusing others of not knowing what THEY'RE talking about.


----------



## Stann (Jan 2, 2005)

PLEASE DISREGARD MY POSTING IF SO INCLINED.



Nevada said:


> While it's true that AOL & Juno require their own software to connect, it's not true that most ISPs operate that way. I operate my own dialup ISP and support both CHAP and PAP authentication with a RADIUS server.
> 
> *We don't want to mislead people. Most people DON'T use your setup, or anything like your setup.*
> 
> ...


Sorry you feel that way. My reply should have been worded more softly.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Stann said:


> We don't want to mislead people. Most people DON'T use your setup, or anything like your setup.


Wrong. Most people use Windows dialup networking to connect to their ISP. Many ISPs use connection configuration software, but it only serves to help configure the Windows dialup networking connection profile. I think you'll find that only a small percentage of Internet subscribers use proprietary ISPs.



Stann said:


> The router config. you indicate is a terrible proposal, too slow as indicated by TeresaS. YOU DO WANT TO DO REMOTE ACCESS. That is the benefit, to use your wireless computer as a "dumb terminal". This is the configuration used by large corporations and the military when wireless just appeared and dialup was also prevalent. Read about remote access on the Symantec site.


Using remote access will NOT increase the bandwidth of the dialup connection and will NOT reduce network delay noticeably. Network delay with wireless adapters is only a few milliseconds, compared to a few hundred milliseconds delay on a typical dialup modem. The network delay with wireless networking is not noticeable when sharing dialup, DSL, or cable Internet connections.



Stann said:


> Sorry you feel that way. My reply should have been worded more softly.


It's not my feelings that are of concern, it's the people looking for help. When you erode their confidence they don't know what to think. They're intimidated enough by the hardware and software as it is.


----------



## backwoodsman7 (Mar 22, 2007)

modineg44 said:


> Is it possible to have a wireless internet connection with dial-up, or does it have to be high speed?
> 
> My phone jack is so far from where I want to have my computer and I really don't want the hassle of finding someone to install another jack.


This thread is getting a lot longer and more confusing than it has to be.

Cheap easy way: Get a phone cord long enough to go from your phone jack to where you want your computer.

Harder, more expensive way: Get a wireless router with a serial port for a modem, and an external serial modem. These routers aren't made anymore but can be had on Ebay for $20 or so incl. shipping. I have a D-Link DI-713P that I use when my broadband wireless goes down; of course it's slow when on dialup, but it works fine. Make sure you _don't_ get a modem that requires Windows; you need a real hardware modem. Of course you'll also need a wireless adapter for the computer, and you may need some help setting it all up.

The folks suggesting that you set up internet connection sharing are assuming that you have two computers, which you didn't say is the case.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

backwoodsman7 said:


> Cheap easy way: Get a phone cord long enough to go from your phone jack to where you want your computer.


As Jeff Foxworthy might say, "If the wireless Internet adapter for your laptop is a 75 foot telephone cord, you just might be a *******!" LOL

Sorry, I couldn't resist.


----------



## Kung (Jan 19, 2004)

Nevada said:


> Wrong. Most people use Windows dialup networking to connect to their ISP. Many ISPs use connection configuration software, but it only serves to help configure the Windows dialup networking connection profile. I think you'll find that only a small percentage of Internet subscribers use proprietary ISPs.
> 
> Using remote access will NOT increase the bandwidth of the dialup connection and will NOT reduce network delay noticeably. Network delay with wireless adapters is only a few milliseconds, compared to a few hundred milliseconds delay on a typical dialup modem. The network delay with wireless networking is not noticeable when sharing dialup, DSL, or cable Internet connections.
> 
> It's not my feelings that are of concern, it's the people looking for help. When you erode their confidence they don't know what to think. They're intimidated enough by the hardware and software as it is.


I would agree. In addition, I'd like to point out something....



> Anyone who wants more info, read about "remote control" access on the Symantec site.


As Nevada pointed out, pcAnywhere is remote control software, and I'm very familiar with it. It's not meant to be used in the manner you suggested, Stann. I understand what you're trying to do, but assuming that the ISP is a decent one with constant speed and the like, the lag time should be minimal, again as Nevada pointed out. Utilizing a remote control software program to accomplish this is unnecessary, as well as RIDICULOUSLY expensive. I know very few homesteaders who will drop $200 to share a dialup connection between 2 computers. For that matter, I know very few homesteaders who will share a dialup connection, period.



> Honestly, no one minds your posting here but make sure you know what you're talking about before giving advice, particularly when you consider accusing others of not knowing what THEY'RE talking about.


Agreed. That might have worked for the government, but we're talking about normal users here on a homesteading board. Let's keep the solutions as simple and inexpensive as possible.

One other thing. MANY of the posters here, including the two posters directly above your first post, Stann, have been here for several years, run their own computing businesses or do their own business as independent consultants and have for several years, AND have implemented the very solutions they suggest. I do, and I have, as well. To imply a lack of knowledge on their part when their knowledge in the minds of this entire subforum has long been established isn't the best thing to do.


----------



## Stann (Jan 2, 2005)

Kung said:


> ...
> As Nevada pointed out, pcAnywhere is remote control software, and I'm very familiar with it. It's not meant to be used in the manner you suggested, Stann.
> 
> * The intent here is to use the remote control over a LAN, the point to point wireless I/F(not over a phone line). THese are two different scenarios, the phone I/F and the LAN I/F and both used in a "remote control" scenario. Again, I'm referring to the LAN I/F type scenario.*
> ...


I'm leaving it at that. You can do want you wish with the post, of course.

ADDED: I wanted to include the remote control solution since many people, other than the original poster, may wish to add wireless capability to their "home dialup" environment. Remote control is often used as a solution.
--------------------------------------------------------------
THis remote control software, over a LAN, is free (I've never tried it, but you can at least glance at it's documentation. I'm NOT recommending it, it's found through Google, but just providing this as a example of another product)
http://www.tucows.com/preview/512244
Remote Control LAN allows you remotely access computers on your network without ever installing an agent. Simply type in the host name, IP address, or browse your Windows domain for the computer. Click connect, and it will automatically install the software needed to control the computer in seconds. No need for extra passwords, since it uses your windows administrator account. Keep your network free of remote control software by using the Uninstall on disconnect option. It allows you to only keep the agent installed on the remote PC while you are connected. Compatible with Windows NT, 2000 , XP, and 2003
-----------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Stann said:


> Anyway you look at it, both solutions need the wireless product (this is a significant cost)


What wireless product at significant cost are you referring to? With my solution, aside from the desktop computer running XP, we're only talking about needing a 56K modem and two wireless adapters. Those items are modestly priced.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Stann said:


> THis remote control software, over a LAN, is free


Remote Control LAN is shareware, not freeware. In other words, it's just a free trial. It costs $129 to continue using it after the free trial period expires.


----------

