Extending/expanding network with multiple routers...

DJ...

DJ...

Banned
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
70,285
Reaction score
3,556
Location
Gauteng
I have 4 routers at home and an 8 port gigabit switch. I've come to the conclusion that I cannot use one router as a wireless repeater having tried and failed numerous times, and considering that none of them support DD-WRT firmware.

My current setup is one wireless ADSL router that serves my main HTPC via ethernet, and all other phones, tablets and PCs connect via WiFi. Considering I have all of these switches and routers, I figured there must be a way for me to optimise my network in a better fashion. The one issue for me is that the HTPC delivers content wirelessly to all other clients running XBMC. This is an issue when more than one device is streaming at a time and slows down the wireless transmission, resulting in buffering. Is there a way for me to set the network up so that the different media clients connect using a different router, but all deliver the same content via the wired HTPC?

Also, I have heard of isolating the ADSL router to only manage the ADSL and use the other routers as APs. I haven't the foggiest how to set this up or if it is even necessary. Some advice here would be appreciated in terms of what my optimum network should look like.

First prize would be to ensure that wireless transmission of the media content is not affected (wired is not an option for these) and my adsl remains stable and fast...
 
Sounds like multiple wireless routers if I am reading correct?

Best you can do is, set them all up, but ensure they make use of different channels. On the 2.4ghz band you should have access to 12 channels, some devices up to 13. Find out which of these channels have the least amount of noise on, then use those.

So let's say you have 3x wireless routers, connected to the adsl router, and the htpc also connected to the adsl router. Then each wireless router (or AP / access point) is on a different channel (different channels actually just changes the frequency a little). Then only connect a single streaming device to each wireless router.

This is possibly the best you can come out with. That said, you really should consider wiring, it always wins hands down over wireless, especially when you have multiple streaming devices.
 
Thanks Tinuva. Unfortunately wired simply isn't an option. The range is huge and would be such a bloody hassle.

Wrt setting up the APs, how do I put them in AP mode? I assume I have to switch off the DHCP server on each, but what else do I have to do?
 
I'm afraid I'm not going to be much help beyond saying that it's an absolute fecking pain in the backside.

I eventually gave up and stumped up for two Wireless Repeater thingys which work okayish.

I also have one machine on the net using "ethernet over power" and that works fine.

Good luck
 
I have a repeater - Netgear. The thing is useless. Drops the connection irrespective of how close it is to the router. Waste of a grand...
 
AfricanTech said:
I'm afraid I'm not going to be much help beyond saying that it's an absolute fecking pain in the backside.

I eventually gave up and stumped up for two Wireless Repeater thingys which work okayish.

I also have one machine on the net using "ethernet over power" and that works fine.

Good luck
Click to expand...

DJ, have you looked at Ethernet over power options maybe? Only thing is that all the plugs need to be on the same circuit, if so there are some pretty cool products available these days.
 
I installed a ethernet cable from my internet router in my pc room to the tv room down stairs and connected it to a second router to share the internet wireless and connected ethernet cables to the tv, surround sound amplifier and router. The down stairs router don't have DHCP enabled and I can share video's from my devices like the Raspberry Pi and pc
 
DrJohnZoidberg said:
DJ, have you looked at Ethernet over power options maybe? Only thing is that all the plugs need to be on the same circuit, if so there are some pretty cool products available these days.
Click to expand...

I have, and I'm considering them, but I figured I'd use what I have for now if I can...
 
DJ... said:
I have, and I'm considering them, but I figured I'd use what I have for now if I can...
Click to expand...
As you experienced, wireless repeating can be problematic, so the idea would be to use the EoP between APs (routers re-configed for the purpose).
 
Roman4604 said:
As you experienced, wireless repeating can be problematic, so the idea would be to use the EoP between APs (routers re-configed for the purpose).
Click to expand...

I just checked and the one important area that needs coverage is served by a separate DB board. It was an extension...:(

Seems I really am going to have to try run 40m of cable...somewhere. The roof isn't an option because the roofs aren't connected, let alone being close to each other. I'd have to dig up paving and grass to lay a cable between them. Or at least try to get the other router as close as possible without that hassle...
 
Routers by design, especially the home variety are meant to be singular devices that bring the outside network (WAN aka DSL/3G etc) to the inside network (LAN) and there should never be more than one on a given network...unless you know what you are doing and the devices also support the setup you require.

Just because a Router has 4 or 5 ports on it doesn't mean it's just another switch/hub that you can plug more stuff into. The same applies to Wireless.

Most routers can't "just" be Access Points, so you can't switch their routing functions off. Some can disable NATing and DHCP which does help if you want to cable...but then switches cost almost nothing.


What you want is 1 Router, however many switches and however many Access Points (Wireless Switches that DO NOT function as routers).

Having multiple Routers will ultimately end up with a NAT behind a NAT behind NAT which will make local traffic almost impossible to accomplish in a reasonable fashion.


If your primary goal is getting wireless everywhere then simply connect one of these to your Router and put it at the furthest point where you need coverage.

The closest machines can connect to the Router's Wireless and the rest can use the Ubiquiti.

http://www.scoopdistribution.co.za/product_info.php?cPath=101_75&products_id=1326


Or if you want to burn some money.

http://www.scoopdistribution.co.za/product_info.php?cPath=101_75&products_id=1348


You cannot go wrong with those products. Throw the other three routers out and it will be the best decision you ever made.
 
Last edited:
Hi There,
SauroNZA idea makes the best sense to me if you insist on being wireless. Wired is still going to be the best option and give you the best performance possible.

Regards

Tim
 
SauRoNZA said:
Most routers can't "just" be Access Points, so you can't switch their routing functions off.
Click to expand...
Why not, routing only occurs between the WAN (Eth/DSL) port and the rest (LAN Eth & Wifi). So just clear/ignore the WAN port, disable DHCP server, optionally reconf LAN IP so doesnt clash (only used for mgmt anyway), and you'll be left with a device that functions as an AP, bridging between its WiFi & LAN (sw) ports.

Haven't found one that couldn't be used this way (and I've used many).
 
Not convinced by that plan. Sure its a higher grade device, but the legal limits regarding transmission power still apply so you're not going to magically get piles of extra range.

I'd investigate a power line communication system, then park each router in a corner of the house, set them to different channels and see if that flies. Check also netstumbler for sorting out channels.

Also DJ...you're going to run into issues with multiple devices streaming pretty much regardless of what you do imo. wifi is pretty easily saturated & stuff starts interfering with eachother.
 
Roman4604 said:
Why not, routing only occurs between the WAN (Eth/DSL) port and the rest (LAN Eth & Wifi). So just clear/ignore the WAN port, disable DHCP server, optionally reconf LAN IP so doesnt clash (only used for mgmt anyway), and you'll be left with a device that functions as an AP, bridging between its WiFi & LAN (sw) ports.

Haven't found one that couldn't be used this way (and I've used many).
Click to expand...

And everything you just said confused the living **** out of the OP.

Also you'll end up with three different AP's with different SSID's that require three different connections, instead of a seamless single integrated network.

It's also highly complex, difficult to manage and unnecessary.


Not all routers allow you to enter a DHCP Relay and a whole lot don't allow you to point to a different gateway either. Which means a Static IP network is the result....which is just poor networking.

I'm not saying its impossible, just not ideal.

HavocXphere said:
Not convinced by that plan. Sure its a higher grade device, but the legal limits regarding transmission power still apply so you're not going to magically get piles of extra range.

I'd investigate a power line communication system, then park each router in a corner of the house, set them to different channels and see if that flies. Check also netstumbler for sorting out channels.

Also DJ...you're going to run into issues with multiple devices streaming pretty much regardless of what you do imo. wifi is pretty easily saturated & stuff starts interfering with eachother.
Click to expand...

Past experience with said device says otherwise. If need be use two, one at each corner of the required area.

I'm running two of them in our offices and I get usable signal three floors down in a concrete structured parking lot.
 
Last edited:
SauRoNZA said:
Also you'll end up with three different AP's with different SSID's that require three different connections
Click to expand...
Nah, optimal config is to give all APs the exact same SSID name (& auth protocol/passwd), but use different channel numbers e.g. 1,6,11. WiFi clients can inherently track multiple instances of an SSID and switch between them based on best signal.

PS: Also don't hide the SSIDs (minimal security value) as the WiFi clients need to see the constant beaconing from each AP to make fast/accurate switching (roaming) decisions.
 
Last edited:
Roman4604 said:
Why not, routing only occurs between the WAN (Eth/DSL) port and the rest (LAN Eth & Wifi). So just clear/ignore the WAN port, disable DHCP server, optionally reconf LAN IP so doesnt clash (only used for mgmt anyway), and you'll be left with a device that functions as an AP, bridging between its WiFi & LAN (sw) ports.

Haven't found one that couldn't be used this way (and I've used many).
Click to expand...

Roman, you're probably good with it having done many.

I've been in the same boat as DJ with wanting to reuse old routers, and it is a pain to say the least.

DJ, after you've sworn for the tenth time and been tempted to grind the devil-spawned things into teeny tiny little pieces because of the endless hassle, you'll probably end up running a line anyway.

Sauron, through concrete eh!

Reckon I might just give that a whirl - don't know how much longer I can withstand the complaints that 'my ipad spends most of it's time with that whirling thing going round and round'
 
AfricanTech said:
Roman, you're probably good with it having done many.

I've been in the same boat as DJ with wanting to reuse old routers, and it is a pain to say the least.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't be too difficult once you have the basic principals straight in your head.

DHCP is the most troublesome, you have to ensure there is only one active DHCP server on your network, and it must be the router connected to the Internet (all devices must default route to its LAN IP). Next is possible IP clashes since most routers default to the same LAN IP address, one needs to make sure the non-Internet (AP) routers are moved to other IPs, but still on the same subnet & outside of the DHCP range. Next make sure you wire together the right ports (LAN only), and lastly follow the WiFi setup recommendations in my previous post.
 
Last edited:
The two routers I'm thinking of have different IP ranges completely (10.0.0.1-100 & 192.168.0.1-100), so here is my layman's understanding:

Enable the dhcp server on the main router connected to the internet.
Connect router two via ethernet and switch off the dhcp server.
Use the same SSID for both routers but on different channels to ensure no interference.
Ensure both routers are broadcasting their SSIDs.

And then they should both serve the internet and content from the media box connected to router one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X