wireless router off a normal router

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

dmj2001@gmail.com - 23 Nov 2005 23:26 GMT

i'm living in an apartment that has had dsl for a while. my roommates
use a normal router off the dsl hookup that gives internet access to
all three of us in our individual rooms. i want to have wireless in the
apartment but they don't want to give up their non-wireless
connections, so i thought i could just buy a wireless router, attach it
to the ethernet cord coming off the central router, and then it would
provide wireless to the apartment without affecting the previous setup
for my roommates.

i tried it today and it hasn't been working. i had the wireless router
on the exact same settings as the computer i was using beforehand
(dhcp, 192.168.1.whatever ip address, 255.255.255.0 subnet mask, etc.).
my question is, what settings do i need to put my second router on so
that it will work? in case any of it is relevant, the wireless router
i'm trying to install is a linksys wireless g and the computer i'm
currently using is an old mac desktop (g3). i'll be using an almost as
old inspiron 4000 when i get my wireless working.

thanks a lot.

Reply to this Message

Michelle Steiner - 24 Nov 2005 00:11 GMT

> i tried it today and it hasn't been working. i had the wireless
> router on the exact same settings as the computer i was using
> beforehand (dhcp, 192.168.1.whatever ip address, 255.255.255.0 subnet
> mask, etc.). my question is, what settings do i need to put my second
> router on so that it will work?

Set it up as a bridge.

Signature

Stop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush.

Reply to this Message

LarryDoc - 24 Nov 2005 18:09 GMT

I have a linksys wired router. I can connect its ethernet output to
either a linksys wireless router or my ancient Apple AirPort base
station and it simply works without any set-up or configuration. Don't
know why, it just does. Saves me from tripping over the ethernet cable
though.

LB

Reply to this Message

nospam - 24 Nov 2005 13:57 GMT

> i'm living in an apartment that has had dsl for a while. my roommates
> use a normal router off the dsl hookup that gives internet access to
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> currently using is an old mac desktop (g3). i'll be using an almost as
> old inspiron 4000 when i get my wireless working.

to hang the wireless router off the main router:

set the local ip address of the wireless router to use an unused ip on
your lan (i.e. 192.168.1.222). be SURE this is outside any dhcp range
that the main router uses (you don't want a conflict) and that it is on
the same subnet as your current lan.

turn OFF dhcp on the wireless router (you do not want more than one
dhcp server on the same lan).

connect a lan port of the main router to a lan port of the wireless
router. you might need a crossover cable (many routers autosense, and
i'm not sure which cable type is needed on the ones that do not). do
not connect anything to the wan port of the wireless router.

alternately, you could copy the settings of the main router into the
wireless router and then just replace the main router with the wireless
one.

Reply to this Message

Johannes Kiessling - 25 Nov 2005 23:09 GMT

Hello :-)

> > i'm living in an apartment that has had dsl for a while. my roommates
> > use a normal router off the dsl hookup that gives internet access to
[quoted text clipped - 28 lines]
> i'm not sure which cable type is needed on the ones that do not). do
> not connect anything to the wan port of the wireless router.

I had just benn told by comp.sys.mac.portables that this group exists.
(They had kindly provided me with most of the answer) and I subscribed
to this group with 25 past entries.
And indeed this was the last one of these - which had exactly my
problem in it (I have DLink and wireless Netgear).
I did exactly as you said above and - bingo - everything works fine :-)
My Power Book, my SA-Risc PC and my winxp all talk to each other and
share the internet :-)
Thanks a lot for this very sound advice!!!

> alternately, you could copy the settings of the main router into the
> wireless router and then just replace the main router with the wireless
> one.

Best regards,
Yo

Signature

My school: http://www.hohenlohe-gymnasium.de
Student's art: http://www.hgoe.kuen.bw.schule.de/art

Reply to this Message

Phil Earnhardt - 26 Nov 2005 03:08 GMT

>to hang the wireless router off the main router:
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>i'm not sure which cable type is needed on the ones that do not). do
>not connect anything to the wan port of the wireless router.

I understand what you're doing (and I have an installation that did
not work the first time around that I need to do next week -- thank
you!).

What I don't understand is why it is needed. How is it that the main
router is cognizant of whether or not the wireless router is even
running DHCP? What evils could happen with cascading routers -- that
seems to be the config I have at home with my Airport Express
connected to a Linksys router, and it works just fine.

An explanation and/or a pointer to a FM that discusses such things
would be appreciated. Thanks.

--phil

Reply to this Message

Sander Tekelenburg - 26 Nov 2005 06:11 GMT

> >to hang the wireless router off the main router:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> >turn OFF dhcp on the wireless router (you do not want more than one
> >dhcp server on the same lan).

[...]

> What I don't understand is why it is needed. How is it that the main
> router is cognizant of whether or not the wireless router is even
> running DHCP? What evils could happen with cascading routers

If you have multiple DHCP servers distributing addresses in the same
range on the same subnet, you'll have some problems :) If you make sure
they don't, then it can work just fine, but I'd still only do that if
you are very aware of what it is exactly that you're doing. If you're
not, you'll get very confused when for instance you take your first stab
at port forwarding without realising that for each instance you may well
need to configure both routers.

Signature

Sander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/>

Mac user: "Macs only have 40 viruses, tops!"
PC user: "SEE! Not even the virus writers support Macs!"

Reply to this Message

Phil Earnhardt - 27 Nov 2005 00:46 GMT

>> >to hang the wireless router off the main router:
>> >
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
>If you have multiple DHCP servers distributing addresses in the same
>range on the same subnet, you'll have some problems :)

That really wasn't the question. From a management perspective, I
completely agree -- it would be insane to use the same block. I have
no plans to do port forwarding; I'm not exactly sure what would nail
you even if you were to use the same block of IP addresses on both
servers -- as long as both were providing NAT services for their
clients.

The root of my question: what constitutes the "same subnet"? It would
seem that a router running DHCP and NAT services has essentially
created a distinct subnet.

The person I'm working with said that he was told he "couldn't have
routing" on his wireless; I don't understand why. But I couldn't
configure it; I'm going to turn off DHCP and NAT on the wireless. I
don't understand why that shouldn't work.

--phil

> If you make sure
>they don't, then it can work just fine, but I'd still only do that if
>you are very aware of what it is exactly that you're doing. If you're
>not, you'll get very confused when for instance you take your first stab
>at port forwarding without realising that for each instance you may well
>need to configure both routers.

Reply to this Message

Sander Tekelenburg - 28 Nov 2005 00:48 GMT

[...]

[...]

> >> >turn OFF dhcp on the wireless router (you do not want more than one
> >> >dhcp server on the same lan).
> >
> >[...]
> >
> >> What I don't understand is why it is needed.

[...]

> The root of my question: what constitutes the "same subnet"? It would
> seem that a router running DHCP and NAT services has essentially
> created a distinct subnet.

I think the issue is obscured by the fact that many boxes are both NAT
routers and DHCP servers (and firewalls, etc.). But they're still 2
different things, even though they live in the same box.

The NAT router defines the range of the subnet. A DHCP server on that
subnet hands out IP leases to devices on that subnet.

So if you'd have a second DHCP server active on that same subnet, you'll
get problems. Whether that second DHCP server lives by itself, or shares
a box with a NAT server is irrelevant *unless* that NAT server is active
and creates its own subnet on the DHCP server is active on *that*.

> The person I'm working with said that he was told he "couldn't have
> routing" on his wireless;

The problem with such statements is that all by themselves they are too
absolute. I would assume the statement refers to a specific context -
wanting to set up a network with specific capabilities. For instance,
like someone else says: Bonjour (aka,Rendez-Vous aka Zero-Conf) doesn't
work across subnets. So if you'd want to use Bonjour across wired and
wireless machines, indeed you'll have to set up the Airport box as a
bridge.

Someone else may *want* to create a different subnet and therefore
*need* to enable routing on the Airport.

Signature

Sander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/>

Mac user: "Macs only have 40 viruses, tops!"
PC user: "SEE! Not even the virus writers support Macs!"

Reply to this Message

Bob Harris - 26 Nov 2005 23:14 GMT

> >to hang the wireless router off the main router:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> --phil

You can also get into a situation where local LAN only services
such as Bonjour (aka Rendezvous, aka zeroconf) do not work if you
want 2 computers to see each other but are separated by a router,
as these protocols do not cross router boundaries (for example, a
network printer may not be visible to one machine and you can pull
your hair out trying to figure out why).

A router that has DHCP and NAT services disalbed (on in the case
of an Aiport base station, "Distribute IP address" disabled), the
device becomes a bridge and does not block LAN only protocols
between the LAN and WAN ports.

Bob Harris

Reply to this Message

Mark Edwards - 30 Nov 2005 13:42 GMT

> > i'm living in an apartment that has had dsl for a while. my roommates
> > use a normal router off the dsl hookup that gives internet access to
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> wireless router and then just replace the main router with the wireless
> one.

Wouldn't hanging a wireless access point be simpler? I am using a
Cisco Wireless-G Access Point of off a D-Link router provided by Verizo
fios. Three desktops run of the D-Link and 3 Laptops of the access
point.

Reply to this Message

michael - 30 Nov 2005 20:46 GMT

> > > i'm living in an apartment that has had dsl for a while. my roommates
> > > use a normal router off the dsl hookup that gives internet access to
[quoted text clipped - 37 lines]
> fios. Three desktops run of the D-Link and 3 Laptops of the access
> point.

I second that suggestion - add a cheap Belkin wireless point and run the
laptops off that (have similar setup and it works great)

m-

Reply to this Message

Norm - 24 Nov 2005 22:41 GMT

> i'm living in an apartment that has had dsl for a while. my roommates
> use a normal router off the dsl hookup that gives internet access to
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> thanks a lot.

I did almost exactly what you want to do....I think.

I attached the base station (Apple Extreme Base Station) to the gateway
router using the LAN port on the base station. Then I set the base
station to NOT distribute IP addresses and set it to configure using
DHCP.

Works fine so far.

HTH. Good luck.

Signature

Please send email to: nwhiii at yahoo dot com

Reply to this Message

Mac Forum / General / Networking / November 2005

wireless router off a normal router