OK this is a dilemma I have when people use the term 'wireless router'. A simple definition of a router is much like that of a switch in that it directs traffic. I know it uses IP protocols before anyone decides to tell me this.
Here is my dilemma if you do not include the hardwire ports on the back.
The main principle of wireless networking (not including mesh networks and this applies to LAN topologies before you get confused) is that the signal is spread out in a 360 degree angle in three dimensions. This means that anyone within this area can send packets to the router and receive them from the router which would just throw on an IP header and send it to the modem. The idea in a wireless network is that you can't use traffic management since you cannot determine the exact location and path for a packet to take it just spreads it all around. So why can people call it a wireless router if it cannot perform any of its basic traffic management functions.
Here is my dilemma if you do not include the hardwire ports on the back.
The main principle of wireless networking (not including mesh networks and this applies to LAN topologies before you get confused) is that the signal is spread out in a 360 degree angle in three dimensions. This means that anyone within this area can send packets to the router and receive them from the router which would just throw on an IP header and send it to the modem. The idea in a wireless network is that you can't use traffic management since you cannot determine the exact location and path for a packet to take it just spreads it all around. So why can people call it a wireless router if it cannot perform any of its basic traffic management functions.
