Wireless Multipoint Bridging / Backhaul Gateway Antenna and AP Selection





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







3















My company is replacing an old wireless bridging system with new 802.11ac gear. Layout is a central building with 4 remote buildings within 180 degrees line of sight. Bridging only.



I think that I want to use less expensive 2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings and a 4x4 radio with omni directional at the head end.



My question is: does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once? The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...










share|improve this question

































    3















    My company is replacing an old wireless bridging system with new 802.11ac gear. Layout is a central building with 4 remote buildings within 180 degrees line of sight. Bridging only.



    I think that I want to use less expensive 2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings and a 4x4 radio with omni directional at the head end.



    My question is: does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once? The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...










    share|improve this question





























      3












      3








      3


      1






      My company is replacing an old wireless bridging system with new 802.11ac gear. Layout is a central building with 4 remote buildings within 180 degrees line of sight. Bridging only.



      I think that I want to use less expensive 2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings and a 4x4 radio with omni directional at the head end.



      My question is: does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once? The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...










      share|improve this question
















      My company is replacing an old wireless bridging system with new 802.11ac gear. Layout is a central building with 4 remote buildings within 180 degrees line of sight. Bridging only.



      I think that I want to use less expensive 2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings and a 4x4 radio with omni directional at the head end.



      My question is: does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once? The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...







      wireless ieee-802.11






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited May 25 at 18:32







      Ron Royston

















      asked May 25 at 17:30









      Ron RoystonRon Royston

      3,6041 gold badge7 silver badges25 bronze badges




      3,6041 gold badge7 silver badges25 bronze badges

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          6

















          does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once?




          No. I forget if MU-MIMO beam forming requires a single extra radio chain or an extra radio chain per client. But you certainly won't be able to send traffic from a 4x4 headend to 4 clients simultaneously.



          I also wouldn't use an omni in this case as you only require 180 degrees of coverage (not 360). Look for a patch/panel/sector antenna that provides you a more ideal coverage pattern.




          The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...




          This would be my preference for this situation. This provides a dedicated connection to each downstream location. It also means a failure at the head end disrupts the network to only one location and not all four.



          Additionally, you said:




          2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings




          I would be concerned about this setup as you can easily run into performance issues. In a point-to-multipoint setup like this, the clients would not be aware of each other, so you would likely run into the hidden node issue and possbly need to implement RTS/CTS. Without proper configuration, you could have worse performance than you have now with your current equipment.






          share|improve this answer

































            3
















            WiFi is half duplex, so only one station can talk at a time. To simultaneously talk to multiple station, you will need multiple radios on separate channels.






            share|improve this answer


























            • MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

              – Ron Royston
              May 25 at 19:43






            • 1





              @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

              – YLearn
              May 25 at 20:58













            • @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

              – Ron Royston
              May 26 at 3:44













            • 802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

              – YLearn
              May 26 at 3:53














            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "496"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            noCode: true, onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });















            draft saved

            draft discarded
















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f59395%2fwireless-multipoint-bridging-backhaul-gateway-antenna-and-ap-selection%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            6

















            does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once?




            No. I forget if MU-MIMO beam forming requires a single extra radio chain or an extra radio chain per client. But you certainly won't be able to send traffic from a 4x4 headend to 4 clients simultaneously.



            I also wouldn't use an omni in this case as you only require 180 degrees of coverage (not 360). Look for a patch/panel/sector antenna that provides you a more ideal coverage pattern.




            The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...




            This would be my preference for this situation. This provides a dedicated connection to each downstream location. It also means a failure at the head end disrupts the network to only one location and not all four.



            Additionally, you said:




            2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings




            I would be concerned about this setup as you can easily run into performance issues. In a point-to-multipoint setup like this, the clients would not be aware of each other, so you would likely run into the hidden node issue and possbly need to implement RTS/CTS. Without proper configuration, you could have worse performance than you have now with your current equipment.






            share|improve this answer






























              6

















              does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once?




              No. I forget if MU-MIMO beam forming requires a single extra radio chain or an extra radio chain per client. But you certainly won't be able to send traffic from a 4x4 headend to 4 clients simultaneously.



              I also wouldn't use an omni in this case as you only require 180 degrees of coverage (not 360). Look for a patch/panel/sector antenna that provides you a more ideal coverage pattern.




              The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...




              This would be my preference for this situation. This provides a dedicated connection to each downstream location. It also means a failure at the head end disrupts the network to only one location and not all four.



              Additionally, you said:




              2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings




              I would be concerned about this setup as you can easily run into performance issues. In a point-to-multipoint setup like this, the clients would not be aware of each other, so you would likely run into the hidden node issue and possbly need to implement RTS/CTS. Without proper configuration, you could have worse performance than you have now with your current equipment.






              share|improve this answer




























                6














                6










                6










                does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once?




                No. I forget if MU-MIMO beam forming requires a single extra radio chain or an extra radio chain per client. But you certainly won't be able to send traffic from a 4x4 headend to 4 clients simultaneously.



                I also wouldn't use an omni in this case as you only require 180 degrees of coverage (not 360). Look for a patch/panel/sector antenna that provides you a more ideal coverage pattern.




                The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...




                This would be my preference for this situation. This provides a dedicated connection to each downstream location. It also means a failure at the head end disrupts the network to only one location and not all four.



                Additionally, you said:




                2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings




                I would be concerned about this setup as you can easily run into performance issues. In a point-to-multipoint setup like this, the clients would not be aware of each other, so you would likely run into the hidden node issue and possbly need to implement RTS/CTS. Without proper configuration, you could have worse performance than you have now with your current equipment.






                share|improve this answer














                does it make sense to use a 4x4 radio with omni antenna at the headend, i.e., does 4x4 mean that it can simultaneously talk to 4 remote AP's at once?




                No. I forget if MU-MIMO beam forming requires a single extra radio chain or an extra radio chain per client. But you certainly won't be able to send traffic from a 4x4 headend to 4 clients simultaneously.



                I also wouldn't use an omni in this case as you only require 180 degrees of coverage (not 360). Look for a patch/panel/sector antenna that provides you a more ideal coverage pattern.




                The alternative would be to deploy multiple gateway radios with directional antenna at the main building...




                This would be my preference for this situation. This provides a dedicated connection to each downstream location. It also means a failure at the head end disrupts the network to only one location and not all four.



                Additionally, you said:




                2x2 radios with directional antenna on the remote buildings




                I would be concerned about this setup as you can easily run into performance issues. In a point-to-multipoint setup like this, the clients would not be aware of each other, so you would likely run into the hidden node issue and possbly need to implement RTS/CTS. Without proper configuration, you could have worse performance than you have now with your current equipment.







                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered May 25 at 21:23









                YLearnYLearn

                24k5 gold badges52 silver badges113 bronze badges




                24k5 gold badges52 silver badges113 bronze badges




























                    3
















                    WiFi is half duplex, so only one station can talk at a time. To simultaneously talk to multiple station, you will need multiple radios on separate channels.






                    share|improve this answer


























                    • MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 25 at 19:43






                    • 1





                      @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

                      – YLearn
                      May 25 at 20:58













                    • @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 26 at 3:44













                    • 802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

                      – YLearn
                      May 26 at 3:53
















                    3
















                    WiFi is half duplex, so only one station can talk at a time. To simultaneously talk to multiple station, you will need multiple radios on separate channels.






                    share|improve this answer


























                    • MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 25 at 19:43






                    • 1





                      @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

                      – YLearn
                      May 25 at 20:58













                    • @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 26 at 3:44













                    • 802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

                      – YLearn
                      May 26 at 3:53














                    3














                    3










                    3









                    WiFi is half duplex, so only one station can talk at a time. To simultaneously talk to multiple station, you will need multiple radios on separate channels.






                    share|improve this answer













                    WiFi is half duplex, so only one station can talk at a time. To simultaneously talk to multiple station, you will need multiple radios on separate channels.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered May 25 at 19:35









                    Ron TrunkRon Trunk

                    45.5k3 gold badges43 silver badges94 bronze badges




                    45.5k3 gold badges43 silver badges94 bronze badges
















                    • MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 25 at 19:43






                    • 1





                      @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

                      – YLearn
                      May 25 at 20:58













                    • @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 26 at 3:44













                    • 802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

                      – YLearn
                      May 26 at 3:53



















                    • MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 25 at 19:43






                    • 1





                      @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

                      – YLearn
                      May 25 at 20:58













                    • @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

                      – Ron Royston
                      May 26 at 3:44













                    • 802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

                      – YLearn
                      May 26 at 3:53

















                    MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

                    – Ron Royston
                    May 25 at 19:43





                    MIMO enables multiple stations to talk at the same time, where talk means that one speaks while the other listens (half duplex), right? So, 4x4 at the headend would enable each remote 2x2 radio to talk to the head end concurrently, right?

                    – Ron Royston
                    May 25 at 19:43




                    1




                    1





                    @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

                    – YLearn
                    May 25 at 20:58







                    @RonRoyston, MU-MIMO in 802.11ac allows a base station (i.e. an AP) to transmit to multiple clients at the same time under certain conditions. Client side MU-MIMO probably won’t be available in practical terms until 802.11ax wave 2 chipsets, if not later.

                    – YLearn
                    May 25 at 20:58















                    @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

                    – Ron Royston
                    May 26 at 3:44







                    @YLearn MU-MIMO is also known as 802.11ac Wave 2. So, in the case of point-to-point backhaul (aka wireless bridging), Client-side MU-MIMO is relevant only insofar as there are multiple headend/gateway radios, right? In other words, there would only be a single transmitter to listen for.

                    – Ron Royston
                    May 26 at 3:44















                    802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

                    – YLearn
                    May 26 at 3:53





                    802.11ac MU-MIMO is only infrastructure side. So only the "AP" can transmit to multiple clients. Multiple clients cannot transmit to the AP at the same time. You will need to way for 802.11ax wave 2 for client side MU-MIMO (multiple clients speaking to infrastructure at the same time).

                    – YLearn
                    May 26 at 3:53



















                    draft saved

                    draft discarded



















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f59395%2fwireless-multipoint-bridging-backhaul-gateway-antenna-and-ap-selection%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

                    He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

                    Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029