Very cool. My current setup requires direct connection to the bridge in
order to set up the shore point to which I connect. And, the NIC has to
be set to the same IP net other than the last number.

Yeah, different setups might require that. There's probably ways to deal
with that but given the adventures you've had thus far it might be prudent
to just stick with what works for you.

Gotcha - cool that you didn't need the switch (though, I'm wondering
why, if the AP has ports, you didn't just use those?).

Wiring. There's a router in the arch, it has 5 ports on it. Running wires
to it requires going down the gunwales and up the arch, with various
bulkheads and panels along the way. There's an access point in a cabinet in
the main cabin. This placement to facilitate best coverage within the
vessel without spreading it out across the water. Again, getting wires to
this location is the issue. The E-80 chartplotter is in the helm, the
Sirius weather interface is in a panel behind the stairs. There's an
RS-232, a video and an ethernet cable running from the E-80 to the sirius
unit. This location is central to where all the devices wiring passes.

I don't "have to" provide extra ports for the E-80/weather setup. But at
some point I'll be using a PC to interface with those devices. So using a
straight cross-over cable between them wouldn't help the expansion plans.
But using the cabin's access point would've meant running their wires
another 10 feet. That's not a technical limitation but just would've added
more labor. This also lets me disable the access point without having it
affect the weather gear, but also leave shore connections working. Yeah,
it's a few more watts to have the switch running, and at some point I'll
check how much. But I took extra effort to make sure all my devices can use
12v so at least there's no loss from inverters or step-down transformers
(besides the ones in the devices themselves of course).

Mine crashes without the router in between.

Well, given your travails thus far I guess you're stuck.

And, I don't currently have a means of
interfacing (other than a single RS232 for the GPS) any of my
electronics to my computer, which I'd like.

I'll be adding a PC to the mix probably over the winter. I'll use that as a
means to bridge a number of things. I've got a waterproof mouse and
keyboard and the PC is an old laptop with a video out. So I'll probably
either use the TV or the E-80 as a display for it. That PC will presumably
allow me to do some more clever things with webcam and GPS. That and the PC
can act as a 'gateway' of sorts of sharing the other NMEA buss data.

I'm in a twin engined powerboat. I don't know, nor care about their
power
consumption.

:{)) I don't suppose I would, either. In actuality, we probably will
try to maximize our use during wind and sun periods, where we'd
otherwise be in shunt mode due to full batteries (solar and wind).

Well, I do care somewhat, if only to avoid having the gear drain the ship's
battery if AC isn't available. I've got a Blue Sea voltage limiter that'll
get installed eventually. I'd rather have it kill the gadgets than run my
battery down. Well, that and adding more batteries to the ship's system
circuit. this winter. A couple of golf cart type cells are likely additions
to help make sure I've got enough to keep all the toys running.

I'd meant directly - POE uses the ethernet cable itsef, starting with
48V and stepping down to 12V at the end. The actual power consumption
I was wondering about was in the units themselves, leading to what
size direct power source wire I'd need.

Go back over to alt.internet.wireless and pose the question. Or STFW for
websites related to neighborhood wifi. I suppose the first step would be to
get actual wattage needs for your gear. Then estimate or measure the actual
distance and then do the math. I didn't bother and just took the 'use
thicker gauge' shortcut. Viking's going of business sale made it a cheap
decision to go with heavier gauge wire than might be "required".

My mother-in-law (England) describes our voice quality as better than
folks calling her locally. Generally speaking, I've heard no complaint
from any one I know on Vonage

The main risks of complaint are encoder quality and bandwidth. It doesn't
matter if it's free or low cost if it's ****ty service. If you're on a link
that's congested you will get reduced audio quality and interruptions. If
there's good network routing along the entire path then it's less likely.
Audio requires not just a 'fast connection' but one that's free of
congestion. It's no good to have a fast link if it's got high latency.

but I can say from direct
experience that CS in Vonage is great

Then keep your fingers crossed. Your experience does not parallel that of
others who've reported considerable difficult getting effective support.
But then again those with problems are the one's making noise, right?

And any of the peer-peer services, or "softphone" (like
Skype and Vonage dongles of whatever sort) adaptations, require a
computer be on, whether or not you can get away without having to be
tied via a headset or even a blootooth device.

Well, there's a good chance that'll change. But as you point out VoIP has
ATA devices that don't require a PC. Of course, what consitutes a PC these
days can nearly come as close to a black box when it comes to size and power
limitations. Not usually as cheaply though.

Mine just requires the
bridge and the (Vonage) router. Because the router is the base
station, my new setup doesn't even need an RJJ11 device powered up to
have two cordless phones active at the same time, a nicety when both of
us want to talk to someone at the same time :{))

Just make sure you're not using 2.4gHz cordless phones. No sense making
your wifi troubles worse..

However, I want to try your bridge, as it seems
like it would be superior to mine if I don't have to unhook to make my
shoreside connections.

I'm hesitant to suggest how to work around your situations limits as it's
unclear just what sort of mess you've finally gotten working. For me it was
easy, from the get-go I assumed I'd have to use two different routers as
there's only one radio in a router. I knew I'd have to use one to speak tot
the shore and another one entirely to cover devices on the boat. Thus the
devices on the boat always have their own network. The shore link device
always has a static address on that network. So the laptops always connect
to the access point and thus always have a link to the shore interface
device. It *may* be possible, in your situation, to do the same. But given
the confusion of posts surrounding your setup I really can't say.

When you put your unit in a NEMA, how big was the box? Did you take
off the case and just do the board, or leave it on?

Heh, I skipped the enclosure entirely. I just bought another router. The
one that's inside the arch isn't enclosed at all (at least not yet). The
access panel is only 6" round but it's hole is about 7". So I disassembled
the router, put it's pieces in through the hole and reassembled it. I'll
eventually stuff it inside a ziploc with some sort of fittings and a bunch
of silica gel packets. But given how cheaply another router was I've been
putting it off...

-Bill Kearney