Wireless Networking question - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 37 Old 01-22-2013, 10:27 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
scipper77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Hypothetically speaking, Could I run my cable modem into a switch and plug 2 different wireless routers into that switch for two separate networks that both have internet access?

This could be useful for me in 2 ways. First it would allow me to have separate networks for my G and N devices. Second I could set up routers at different locations in my house allowing a better signal based on which router I connect to.

I really don't need to do this as I am in the process of hard wiring everything in my house except the laptops and cell phones, but I was just curious if it was even an option.
scipper77 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 37 Old 01-22-2013, 10:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
aliaskary77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 43
nope, only one would connect and get an ip externally. most residential services will not allow more than one ip assignment per account. you could pay to get another one, then it should work.

alternative is to daisy chain the 2nd router off the first. the first could serve 192.168.10.X and the second 192.168.20.X, essentially keeping them separate. Use any numbers you want as long as the third octet is different.

the "wan" on the second router would get an address of 192.168.10.X and use the 1st router as the internet provider, but the dhcp portion of the 2nd router and devices connected to to it would be one 192.168.20.X.

note: the post above is my opinion. as such, when reading any recommendations from me, please do you research and seek out other recommendations and make up your own mind on your next course of action. i mean, most reasonable adults should know that, but it seems this should be stated anyways.
aliaskary77 is online now  
post #3 of 37 Old 01-22-2013, 10:38 AM
Advanced Member
 
aliaskary77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 581
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked: 43
if you have not bought the hardware yet, i would get one good router and 2 access points or one access point to get more coverage. no need to keep G and N networks separate, unless you want to keep networks apart, like if you have roomates etc.

note: the post above is my opinion. as such, when reading any recommendations from me, please do you research and seek out other recommendations and make up your own mind on your next course of action. i mean, most reasonable adults should know that, but it seems this should be stated anyways.
aliaskary77 is online now  
post #4 of 37 Old 01-22-2013, 10:54 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
scipper77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I appreciate the reply. I really don't need to do this. I have a wireless N router that serves my whole home just fine. It is not a dual band router however but that won't matter for web surfing on the laptop and cell phones. I am waiting on my gigabit switch to come in the mail so I can get my bluray, tv, and reciever in the basement theater off of a wireless network. I would prefer that my router not run n and g at the same time but the reality is that I'm not ever going to be doing any heavy bandwidth operations over the wireless after I get my gigabit infrastructure installed.

If my old wireless g router hadn't started failing (the reason why I switched to n in the first place) I would likely try connecting both routers together as you suggested. It would be a just because I can thing however, it serves no real advantage for my actual usage.

Thanks again.
scipper77 is offline  
post #5 of 37 Old 01-23-2013, 12:31 PM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
first, what is suggested will not work. The Diasy Chain idea, as explain will cause double NATing, and thus not work the way your intend.

It's possible to do, but you need different equipment. To have two different networks, you'll need more powerful software/firmware. Maybe DDWRT or Tomato may work; you'd have to research if your modem was compatible and if there firmware/software supported it. You could go with something like Untangle, Smoothwall, PfSense and so on, but you'll need a space PC and additiion NICs to do it. I personally do this in my LAN, but for different because of my own online paranoia.

I'm not exactly sure what exactly your trying to achieve. You're trying to do things: more range, but separate networks for N and G. Depending the on the router, you can create separate SSID networks for N versus G, such as the DLink 655. If you have these two routes already, you could just bridge one router into the other. This will allow to have two separate SSIDs, but you're still on the network like 192.111.111.1. Your just going to assign on router an IP outside the one that actually doing the routing; you're turning the machine into a wireless access point.

For more range, you can look into getting larger antennas if your router allows you to replace them. This can range from about twenty dollars to hundreds of dollars. You can literally set it up to be able to broadcast your neighborhood you're willing to spend the money. The option, put in some repeaters. They're essentially just wireless access points. I haven't looked into getting one myself, but they're may be some that can support more than one SSID/network.

End of the day, you may not have to do all that. Depending on what your house is made out of and location, you may be able to get good signal throughout the whole house. I live in small home, just 1300 square feet. My wireless points at the front of the house. I get signal about halfway through our large backyard. The signal has to travel through several walls and a kitchen. I probably get more range if I had them high on the wall instead mounted under a desk.
lovekeiiy is offline  
post #6 of 37 Old 01-23-2013, 01:23 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
scipper77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
I'm really not trying to do anything, just trying to learn a little bit about how everything works together.

My mind started down this path when my smart TV in the basement was having issues streaming YouTube over the wireless N connection (excessive buffering for most HD content). It got me to thinking about possible causes of poor wireless performance like weak signal, too many devices connected at once, mixed mode operation.

To solve the problem I am installing a switch and putting all stationary devices on a gigabit connection (2 recievers, bluray, smart tv, wii, computer, and so on). So there is really no need to mess around with the wireless network at this time. Even if the wireless N is not the issue I think the $43 it has cost me to get everything off of N that doesn't require it is well worth it. Actually part of that $43 was for a 35' toslink cable so it was even cheaper than that. Just waiting on parts.
scipper77 is offline  
post #7 of 37 Old 01-23-2013, 08:35 PM
Member
 
jimbo75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 94
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovekeiiy View Post

first, what is suggested will not work. The Diasy Chain idea, as explain will cause double NATing, and thus not work the way your intend.

The daisy chain would work. You just need to put a static route on router #1 pointing to the network on router #2.
jimbo75 is offline  
post #8 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:31 AM
Advanced Member
 
balky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by scipper77 View Post

Hypothetically speaking, Could I run my cable modem into a switch and plug 2 different wireless routers into that switch for two separate networks that both have internet access?

This could be useful for me in 2 ways. First it would allow me to have separate networks for my G and N devices. Second I could set up routers at different locations in my house allowing a better signal based on which router I connect to.

I really don't need to do this as I am in the process of hard wiring everything in my house except the laptops and cell phones, but I was just curious if it was even an option.

Yes, it is possible...

So long as the inside interface of your cable modem supports the use of two IP addresses.
Imagine 192.168.1.0 on one wireless router and 192.168.2.0 on the second one.
Each router will be configured as a DHCP server.
The inside interface of your cable modem will have two sub-interfaces with IP address 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.2.1.
The DHCP server in each wireless modem will use the corresponding IP address as the default gateway

The outside interface remains untouched and you will not need another IP address from your provider.

You are probably better off using different SSID on each wireless router to make the separation complete...
balky is offline  
post #9 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:39 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
scipper77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
You guys are making me wish my old router didn't need several reboots a day so I could play. One thing I have learned is that if I try to configure something like this on an intermittently functioning router it will be an exercise in frustration rather than a learning experience.
scipper77 is offline  
post #10 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 05:41 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
Mfusick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Western MA
Posts: 21,502
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Liked: 663
Yup. Crappy stuff or broken stuff is never worth the frustration

-

"Too much is almost enough. Anything in life worth doing is worth overdoing. Moderation is for cowards."
Mfusick is online now  
post #11 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 07:07 AM
Advanced Member
 
balky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by scipper77 View Post

You guys are making me wish my old router didn't need several reboots a day so I could play. One thing I have learned is that if I try to configure something like this on an intermittently functioning router it will be an exercise in frustration rather than a learning experience.

Maybe it is time to get something a little more decent... biggrin.gif

I can't imagine having to reboot my router everyday... Neighbours will notice a UFO coming out of my window... smile.gif
balky is offline  
post #12 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 07:20 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Puwaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
You guys are over thinking this. Yes you can do what the OP wants. Just turn off the DHCP server on the wifi routers and your main router that is hooked up to your ISP will hand out the IPs transparently.

This essentially makes the wifi "routers" into wifi hotspots and local switches. You don't plug anything into the WAN port of the wifi routers, just the LAN switch ports including the ethernet feeds from the main router.

You will need to make sure each wifi "router" has its own SSID and channel.
Puwaha is offline  
post #13 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 09:25 AM
Senior Member
 
chappy16775's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puwaha View Post

You guys are over thinking this. Yes you can do what the OP wants. Just turn off the DHCP server on the wifi routers and your main router that is hooked up to your ISP will hand out the IPs transparently.

This essentially makes the wifi "routers" into wifi hotspots and local switches. You don't plug anything into the WAN port of the wifi routers, just the LAN switch ports including the ethernet feeds from the main router.

You will need to make sure each wifi "router" has its own SSID and channel.

I did this very thing and it works OK but still I get a lot of dropped connections when moving between the two - especially with my iPhone 4S. Again, when connecting to either and sitting in one place it's great - the problems arise when moving between the two. I expected the laptop/mobile device to simply hop over to the stronger signal seamlessly but not the case. Not sure why.
chappy16775 is offline  
post #14 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 11:00 AM
Advanced Member
 
andersa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 547
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by chappy16775 View Post

I did this very thing and it works OK but still I get a lot of dropped connections when moving between the two - especially with my iPhone 4S. Again, when connecting to either and sitting in one place it's great - the problems arise when moving between the two. I expected the laptop/mobile device to simply hop over to the stronger signal seamlessly but not the case. Not sure why.

For WLAN, hand-off between access points is the responsibility of the device and there seem to be few (if any) devices that does this today AFAIK.
andersa is offline  
post #15 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 11:23 AM
Advanced Member
 
balky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked: 19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puwaha View Post

You guys are over thinking this. Yes you can do what the OP wants. Just turn off the DHCP server on the wifi routers and your main router that is hooked up to your ISP will hand out the IPs transparently.

This essentially makes the wifi "routers" into wifi hotspots and local switches. You don't plug anything into the WAN port of the wifi routers, just the LAN switch ports including the ethernet feeds from the main router.

You will need to make sure each wifi "router" has its own SSID and channel.

I think you clearly missed the point on the OP wanting two separate networks...
balky is offline  
post #16 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 12:38 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Puwaha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,122
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 30
I don't want to speak for the OP but there is no reason two have two separate "networks". As I read it he wants to use two wifi routers, a G and an N to provide two different access points with differing speeds.

There is no reason to do double-NATing or static routes in the home unless you are trying to segregate traffic.
Puwaha is offline  
post #17 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 02:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,296
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puwaha View Post

You guys are over thinking this. Yes you can do what the OP wants. Just turn off the DHCP server on the wifi routers and your main router that is hooked up to your ISP will hand out the IPs transparently.

This essentially makes the wifi "routers" into wifi hotspots and local switches. You don't plug anything into the WAN port of the wifi routers, just the LAN switch ports including the ethernet feeds from the main router.

You will need to make sure each wifi "router" has its own SSID and channel.

I agree that it's over thought, and reading the OP I can't find any reasoning for wanting 2 networks

However, you do connect from LAN to WAN. It's not LAN to LAN

And it's much simpler to have the same SSID and security, as long as DHCP is turned off the whole coverage area (and all LAN ports) will just be one large network. NAT is no different for this approach than it is when connecting to a switch behind a router
Dark_Slayer is online now  
post #18 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 02:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,296
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 228
http://www.belkin.com/support/dl/f5d6231-4_v2-%20manual.pdf Pg 49 here

http://homekb.cisco.com/Cisco2/GetArticle.aspx?docid=28cee6a2fb0d4176a2210942d1d5836c_Setting_up_the_Linksys_E4200_in_bridge_mode.xml Bottom picture here

Then the infamous DD-WRT. I take it that's where you're coming from with the LAN-to-LAN reasoning? Step 3 explains what to do in the config to go LAN-to-WAN, not sure why they flat out recommend LAN-LAN at first http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Wireless_Access_Point
Dark_Slayer is online now  
post #19 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:01 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
scipper77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
Well I had no idea my question would draw so much interest. For the record I have no idea what I would have wanted to accomplish. This was just a pure what if type of question that i tried to justify after the fact.

My gigabit switch came in today so I can stop playing pretend elaborate wireless network and set up a properly designed physical network. When I am done there will be at most 1 laptop, 1 ipod, and 2 cell phones using the wireless at any time unless we have guests with smartphones over. But please keep the discussion going, I think plenty of people are learning a lot from this discussion.
scipper77 is offline  
post #20 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:06 PM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
the last link Dark provided is exactly what I was saying, but in a picture. My post, #5, may have been long winded, but it actually covered a different issues with the problems and solutions that may work best.

And NAT does not have anything to with how many routers. This deals with resolving that the "internet" has a different IP than inside the LAN. Thus, double NATing is doubling the work, and causes at lot of problems that are not always apparent.

The "daisy chain" as present, will either not work because it will either double NAT, which unless the main router has advance features to handle two network, means each router will be doing router, evident from two different networks: 192.168.1.x and 192.168.2.x. The turning off the NAT (routing) in the routers and using the access points, assumes the modem from the ISP has a build in router. Not many that many ISP actually do this if it's a similar modem. What you're trying to propose is using the second as an access point or switch.

As to how to setup the various suggestions for access points or switches, it's going to depend on the make and model of the router(s). Some are build to use WAN port, others are not.

The sad bad, we're basically suggesting the same thing, but either have different names or misunderstanding of some key networking principles.
lovekeiiy is offline  
post #21 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:26 PM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by scipper77 View Post

... For the record I have no idea what I would have wanted to accomplish. ...

And this is why the answers are all over the place because we're all making different assumptions on what problem you're trying to resolve.

Good of bad, networking is rather limited on how it can be setup. Sometimes if works if not completely correct, but always has issues, even if not apparent.

As for your home WiFi, how many devices you have hooked up is not an issue, per se. It's more, how many devices can your router support or many IPs will your DHCP server support. I've had over twenty in mine. A few years back, it wasn't uncommon for consumer routers to have a limit of ten.

As for your router needing reboots, that shouldn't be happening, at least not daily. Here and there, like once a month or less, not an issue. It's possible your network isn't set completely right or your router is going out.
lovekeiiy is offline  
post #22 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:27 PM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
This is my LAN. Way more complicated than it really needs to be:
lovekeiiy is offline  
post #23 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:40 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
scipper77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 13
My old router needed the reboots. That was what prompted me to get a new wireless n router. Because my old "g" router is not stable I decided i am not going to experiment with running 2 wireless routers at one time. I have also stated that even if i did any of this it would just be for fun.
scipper77 is offline  
post #24 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
nothing wrong with fun. Just have to have idea of what you want to achieve in the fun.

If you see my setup, I have three routers, that are just wireless access points. There is technically four SSIDs. It's not recommend to have them that close because of potential radio interference The black PC is actually my router and hardware firewall. The box sitting on the white ones is my modem. You can also see my print server, voip adapter, my HDHomerun, and lots of cabling. It lots worse than it is. But once you understand some basic networking principles, it's not that bad.. It's more learning how to do it on a particular device.
lovekeiiy is offline  
post #25 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 04:59 PM
Newbie
 
shiboboo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
This thread got me thinking about a possible solution to an annoying problem I've encountered: I cannot get my ps3 to connect wirelessly, but wired it's just fine.

I've tried manual set up with assigning the ps3 a static ip. I've turned off the router firewall as well as the wpa2 psk of the ssid. I've tried a combination of things, but nothing has worked.

I have an Asus rt-ac66u, so I have separate 5ghz ac and 2.4ghz networks set up. I have an Engenius ESR9850 N router currently sitting unused which boasts a "range extender" feature. What I'm looking to do is have the Asus maintain it's position in the network as the main router and have the Engenius sit downstairs by the ps3 and pick up the 2.4ghz N network wirelessly. I don't want a separate N network with a different ssid, as the Asus' network signal strength is good enough throughout my house. My only end goal for this is to plug the ps3 into the Engenius to hopefully trick the ps3 into thinking it's truly a wired connection, and thus work. This should be feasible, correct?
shiboboo is offline  
post #26 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 05:47 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,296
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked: 228
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiboboo View Post

This thread got me thinking about a possible solution to an annoying problem I've encountered: I cannot get my ps3 to connect wirelessly, but wired it's just fine.

I've tried manual set up with assigning the ps3 a static ip. I've turned off the router firewall as well as the wpa2 psk of the ssid. I've tried a combination of things, but nothing has worked.

I have an Asus rt-ac66u, so I have separate 5ghz ac and 2.4ghz networks set up. I have an Engenius ESR9850 N router currently sitting unused which boasts a "range extender" feature. What I'm looking to do is have the Asus maintain it's position in the network as the main router and have the Engenius sit downstairs by the ps3 and pick up the 2.4ghz N network wirelessly. I don't want a separate N network with a different ssid, as the Asus' network signal strength is good enough throughout my house. My only end goal for this is to plug the ps3 into the Engenius to hopefully trick the ps3 into thinking it's truly a wired connection, and thus work. This should be feasible, correct?

don't know which ps3 you have, but I don't think any current models have wireless n. if you are asking your router to create an n only band instead of a mixed mode b/g/n band then your ps3 won't be able to connect
Dark_Slayer is online now  
post #27 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 09:31 PM
Newbie
 
shiboboo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have an original fat ps3. I know it has wireless n because it sees my N only network if I run a scan for ssid's.
shiboboo is offline  
post #28 of 37 Old 01-24-2013, 11:20 PM
Newbie
 
shiboboo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
It works when I connect the ps3 to the engenius (acting as a repeater) through an ethernet cable. Still can't get it to connect to the exact same network, wirelessly without the repeater.
shiboboo is offline  
post #29 of 37 Old 01-25-2013, 07:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiboboo View Post

This thread got me thinking about a possible solution to an annoying problem I've encountered: I cannot get my ps3 to connect wirelessly, but wired it's just fine.

I've tried manual set up with assigning the ps3 a static ip. I've turned off the router firewall as well as the wpa2 psk of the ssid. I've tried a combination of things, but nothing has worked.

I have an Asus rt-ac66u, so I have separate 5ghz ac and 2.4ghz networks set up. I have an Engenius ESR9850 N router currently sitting unused which boasts a "range extender" feature. What I'm looking to do is have the Asus maintain it's position in the network as the main router and have the Engenius sit downstairs by the ps3 and pick up the 2.4ghz N network wirelessly. I don't want a separate N network with a different ssid, as the Asus' network signal strength is good enough throughout my house. My only end goal for this is to plug the ps3 into the Engenius to hopefully trick the ps3 into thinking it's truly a wired connection, and thus work. This should be feasible, correct?

Well, you really need to give more information. Basically, you're want to use the Engnenious as a repeater or a bridge, wihich is WiFi or wired connection respoective, to the main router.

Where does PS3 fail in connecting to the ASUS. It's possible, the PS3 does not play nice with the ASUS. Does the PS3 even see the SSID on the ASUS; I'm assuming you're broadcast is set to be seen. Have tried manually entering the SSID and passphrase? The static IP would be something you need for portforwading or DMZ because you're not getting a NAT2.
lovekeiiy is offline  
post #30 of 37 Old 01-25-2013, 07:18 AM
Advanced Member
 
lovekeiiy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Posts: 983
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by shiboboo View Post

This thread got me thinking about a possible solution to an annoying problem I've encountered: I cannot get my ps3 to connect wirelessly, but wired it's just fine.

I've tried manual set up with assigning the ps3 a static ip. I've turned off the router firewall as well as the wpa2 psk of the ssid. I've tried a combination of things, but nothing has worked.

I have an Asus rt-ac66u, so I have separate 5ghz ac and 2.4ghz networks set up. I have an Engenius ESR9850 N router currently sitting unused which boasts a "range extender" feature. What I'm looking to do is have the Asus maintain it's position in the network as the main router and have the Engenius sit downstairs by the ps3 and pick up the 2.4ghz N network wirelessly. I don't want a separate N network with a different ssid, as the Asus' network signal strength is good enough throughout my house. My only end goal for this is to plug the ps3 into the Engenius to hopefully trick the ps3 into thinking it's truly a wired connection, and thus work. This should be feasible, correct?

Well, you really need to give more information. Basically, you're want to use the Engnenious as a repeater or a bridge, wihich is WiFi or wired connection respoective, to the main router.

Where does PS3 fail in connecting to the ASUS. It's possible, the PS3 does not play nice with the ASUS. Does the PS3 even see the SSID on the ASUS; I'm assuming you're broadcast is set to be seen. Have tried manually entering the SSID and passphrase? The static IP would be something you need for portforwading or DMZ because you're not getting a NAT2.
lovekeiiy is offline  
Reply Home Theater Computers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off