or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming › Connecting Two Routers Possible?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Connecting Two Routers Possible?

post #1 of 56
Thread Starter 
Greetings, I have a AT&T U-verse wireless router upstairs in my home. My dedicated theatre room is downstairs in the basement. Is there a way to connect a router down there wirelessly to the main U-Verse router upstairs so that I can ethernet cable connect my HTPC and receiver?

Thanks
post #2 of 56
You do not need another router. What you need is a switch and Wifi Access point downstairs, if you need both wired and wireless down there.
post #3 of 56
Thread Starter 
Oh, would you mind directing me to a product so I know what to look for?
post #4 of 56
Depends on your brand that you like. There is Netgear, Trendnet, Linksys, D-Link, Asus, etc.. Smallnetbuilder.com has a lot of good info to compare equipment. On my network, I use a Netgear GS-108 downstairs, and up at my a/v center I use a Trendnet TEG-S50g for the two switches on my network. Access points I have a Netgear WN802T-200, and a Trendnet TEW-690AP. Both of the Access Points serve a certain purpose. The Netgear is a Hybrid Wireless-G/N A/P, and the Trendnet is a true Wireless-N A/P.

One is on the back of my house, the other is on the front of my house, and we have the U-Verse RG downstairs to serve Wireless-B/G for two devices that come off that A/P. One being our Wireless thermostat with a Wireless-B radio, the other is a Foscam IP camera that is able to pick up the signal on the RG better than the signal on the Netgear A/P on the back of the house in a bedroom.

All I have is really just six ethernet runs in my place. Three for U-Verse, two for the Access Points/Switch combo, and one for a IP camera in the front of the house. Majority of my wireless devices come off the Trendnet TEW-690ap, two (printer & PS3) come off the Netgear A/P. This setup works for me, may not for you, but it is really up to you to decide what works best.

Netgear and D-Link make plug in Wireless Access Points, that use Ethernet over Power also. So it is again up to you how you set up your network how you want it.
post #5 of 56
Thread Starter 
Wow awesome. When you say Switch what are you referring to?
post #6 of 56
Think of a traffic cop standing in the middle of a intersection with multiple lanes of traffic, directing who goes where, so there are no accidents while moving the traffic through the intersection. The 1000meg switches take it one step further by handling large amounts of traffic in one frame, unlike a 10/100meg switch that can only handle a small block of traffic per frame.

Two of the best resources out there are http://www.ezlan.net and http://www.smallnetbuilder.com. Cisco also has a lot of good info on how networking works. It is a learn by the seat of your pants the majority of the time, when it comes to figuring stuff out, and getting stuff to work like you want it to, especially in setups like mine which is close to being a small office setup, with two NAS drives, and over 20 devices on it, both wired and wireless mixed.
post #7 of 56
Thread Starter 
post #8 of 56
I would go with a Wireless-N A/P, since you will get the best overall result on your network, when moving files around and streaming movies from a server, if you burn your DVD's and Blu-Ray's to ISO's. As for that switch, no problem with that. I know the Trendnet I got was around the same price.
post #9 of 56
i prefer a static connection too. that way, there will be no conflicts whatsoever on your devices. what i did was put sticker on my devices and labeled them with their corresponding IP's. make sure you'll have a printed copy of all your devices IP's and DNS's too. it'll really come in handy.
post #10 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaygax View Post

i prefer a static connection too. that way, there will be no conflicts whatsoever on your devices. what i did was put sticker on my devices and labeled them with their corresponding IP's. make sure you'll have a printed copy of all your devices IP's and DNS's too. it'll really come in handy.
The only devices I have that have Static IP's, are my three cameras, the two A/P's, and the two NAS drives so that they do not change if I have to do a full reset on my RG.
post #11 of 56
Thread Starter 
Do I have to get both Cisco brands or can 1 be Cisco and say the AP be a different brand and still work together?

I read that the main difference between N and G is speed but things only go as fast as the slowest device, which will probably be my U-Verse router?

Will this AP and Switch be compliant with my U-verse router?

Something like this for AP then? http://www.amazon.com/D-Link-DAP-2553-Premier-N-Dual-Band-Selectable/dp/B001P817YO/ref=sr_1_15?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1372873291&sr=1-15&keywords=cisco+access+point+wireless-n

Thanks.
Edited by mijotter - 7/3/13 at 11:08am
post #12 of 56
You can go with whatever brand you want. I personally stopped using Linksys/Cisco gear for consumer routers and switches after having too many issues with them, along with customers that I support.

I usually will recommend Netgear at the low end, then Trendnet at the next step up. Again it is up to you, but for the price of Wireless-n gear, and that they handle large packets, multistreaming better, you are better off.

Only time I would use Wireless B or G, is for long haul, when N will not reach the gear I am trying to connect to.
post #13 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaygax View Post

i prefer a static connection too. that way, there will be no conflicts whatsoever on your devices. what i did was put sticker on my devices and labeled them with their corresponding IP's. make sure you'll have a printed copy of all your devices IP's and DNS's too. it'll really come in handy.

For my important devices I will allow DHCP to assign an address from its pool and then reserve that address. This alleviates the need to keep track of available IP addresses in a subnet, and a heck of a lot of configuring of IP address, subnet mask, DNS servers at each client. You can also go into your router for a list of devices within a DHCP pool (printed copy is good in case the router goes south; I also have host files on all of my computers).

These days the top consumer N router ratings seem to go (in this order) to:

ASUS
Linksys
Netgear

I'm a fan of Linksys because of consistent performance and no issues, but if I were buying today I'd get the Asus RT-N66U.
post #14 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Do I have to get both Cisco brands or can 1 be Cisco and say the AP be a different brand and still work together?

I read that the main difference between N and G is speed but things only go as fast as the slowest device, which will probably be my U-Verse router?

Will this AP and Switch be compliant with my U-verse router?

Something like this for AP then? http://www.amazon.com/D-Link-DAP-2553-Premier-N-Dual-Band-Selectable/dp/B001P817YO/ref=sr_1_15?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1372873291&sr=1-15&keywords=cisco+access+point+wireless-n

Thanks.

As stated, the brand does not matter, and all networking gear is compliant with each other because they follow standards. You have nothing to worry about.

Don't buy a router that isn't 802.11n, which will support both 2.4GHz and 5 GHz frequency band.

There are a kajillion links to help set up a second router or AP, this should be a fun learning experience for you. If you have trouble come back for help. Good luck!
post #15 of 56
Thread Starter 
Guys thanks so much for the help. Would I need to hook my BD player, Receiver, and PC to the desktop switch in order to have them all on the same network? Or since the Bluray will be connected to the AVR via HDMI do I not need to cat6 that that as well? So I know how many cables to run before I put my drywall up this week hopefully.
post #16 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nethawk View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Do I have to get both Cisco brands or can 1 be Cisco and say the AP be a different brand and still work together?

I read that the main difference between N and G is speed but things only go as fast as the slowest device, which will probably be my U-Verse router?

Will this AP and Switch be compliant with my U-verse router?

Something like this for AP then? http://www.amazon.com/D-Link-DAP-2553-Premier-N-Dual-Band-Selectable/dp/B001P817YO/ref=sr_1_15?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1372873291&sr=1-15&keywords=cisco+access+point+wireless-n

Thanks.

As stated, the brand does not matter, and all networking gear is compliant with each other because they follow standards. You have nothing to worry about.

Don't buy a router that isn't 802.11n, which will support both 2.4GHz and 5 GHz frequency band.

There are a kajillion links to help set up a second router or AP, this should be a fun learning experience for you. If you have trouble come back for help. Good luck!

"Dont buy a router that isnt 802.11n

Wireless N came out in 2006 and everything going forward is going to AC

Dont buy an N router get an AC one and future proof yourself and appreciate the speed and coverage

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
post #17 of 56
The key here is "is going". There's no reason to get an AC router when few clients support AC. You've got a couple of years of future ahead of you, wait for second generation chips.
post #18 of 56
Someone who posts in this fashion isn't going to want to replace the router in a year and will want a set it and forget unit that will offer them excellent performance today and in the future.

OP correct me if I'm wrong.

It just seems so illogical in a world where technology advances so quickly to make a purchase and say "yes I want to purchase 7 year old technology"


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
post #19 of 56
Wireless N will remain the widespread standard for years yet. It seems even more illogical to dismiss technology based on the number of years it's been available. Sure you can buy an AC router now, but you'll still be using 802.11n or g.

Sometime in the second half of 2014 2nd generation AC will support 160MHz channel size. Today maximum channel width is 80MHz. Predictive channel selection will improve, range will improve, interference mitigation will improve.

I repeat. With a still emerging technology and almost no endpoint support, it makes no sense to buy into 802.11ac now. Unless you really think you can ever future proof yourself from technology.
post #20 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Guys thanks so much for the help. Would I need to hook my BD player, Receiver, and PC to the desktop switch in order to have them all on the same network? Or since the Bluray will be connected to the AVR via HDMI do I not need to cat6 that that as well? So I know how many cables to run before I put my drywall up this week hopefully.
post #21 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Guys thanks so much for the help. Would I need to hook my BD player, Receiver, and PC to the desktop switch in order to have them all on the same network? Or since the Bluray will be connected to the AVR via HDMI do I not need to cat6 that that as well? So I know how many cables to run before I put my drywall up this week hopefully.

Yes, you would want to connect them all to the same switch, directly to the router, or to another switch connected to that router, any way you do it they will be on the same network. You can also connect one switch to another.

You can run one line to your switch and connect all the devices to it. If it were me I would run at least two ethernet lines, for some unforeseen future possibility that I may want two networks, or in case one cable somehow gets damaged.

You can use a wireless router as a switch and an access point (like this) I agree that an wireless 'n' makes more sense than wireless 'ac' for now. 'n' cost less and is well supported...its pretty easy to replace with an 'ac' in the future when you actually need it, no sense paying extra right now IMO.
Edited by DanPackMan - 7/8/13 at 9:11am
post #22 of 56
Thread Starter 
Ok been doing some reading and looking at diagrams(how you guys make sense of all of this is beyond me hehe). Here's my understanding:

Have 1 Wireless Access Point in the basement that is wirelessly connected to my router up stairs.

Connect my 8 port Desktop Switch by ethernet to the Access Point.

All of my equipment(BD player, Receiver, HTPC, etc) gets plugged in to the Switch via ethernet cables.

Does that sound about right?
post #23 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Ok been doing some reading and looking at diagrams(how you guys make sense of all of this is beyond me hehe). Here's my understanding:

Have 1 Wireless Access Point in the basement that is wirelessly connected to my router up stairs.

Connect my 8 port Desktop Switch by ethernet to the Access Point.

All of my equipment(BD player, Receiver, HTPC, etc) gets plugged in to the Switch via ethernet cables.

Does that sound about right?

If your access point is properly connected, the correct term would be a wireless bridge, yet this setup will work. A traditional access point requires a hardwired connection to the network and then wireless devices connect through it. A bridge will connect w wired device to the network over a wireless path. There are specific devices dedicated for this application (example).

Obviously, all of your devices in the basement will be limited by the quality of the wireless connection. If there is any way to run a hardwired connection to the basement instead, that would be the ideal setup.

edited for clarification
Edited by DanPackMan - 7/8/13 at 10:09am
post #24 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanPackMan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Ok been doing some reading and looking at diagrams(how you guys make sense of all of this is beyond me hehe). Here's my understanding:

Have 1 Wireless Access Point in the basement that is wirelessly connected to my router up stairs.

Connect my 8 port Desktop Switch by ethernet to the Access Point.

All of my equipment(BD player, Receiver, HTPC, etc) gets plugged in to the Switch via ethernet cables.

Does that sound about right?

If your access point is properly connected, yet this setup will work. Obviously, all of your devices in the basement will be limited by the quality of the wireless connection. If there is any way to run a hardwired connection to the basement instead, that would be the ideal setup.

With a good ac router there won't be a limitation of the wireless connection..


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
post #25 of 56
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanPackMan View Post

If your access point is properly connected, the correct term would be a wireless bridge, yet this setup will work. A traditional access point requires a hardwired connection to the network and then wireless devices connect through it. A bridge will connect w wired device to the network over a wireless path. There are specific devices dedicated for this application (example).

Obviously, all of your devices in the basement will be limited by the quality of the wireless connection. If there is any way to run a hardwired connection to the basement instead, that would be the ideal setup.

edited for clarification

Awesome and if I need additional ports past the 4 that are on the bridge I can just hook a switch to the bridge right?
post #26 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by yaomizzle View Post

With a good ac router there won't be a limitation of the wireless connection..

I doubt his existing router is ac.
post #27 of 56
Quote:
Originally Posted by mijotter View Post

Awesome and if I need additional ports past the 4 that are on the bridge I can just hook a switch to the bridge right?

Yes, now you got it.
post #28 of 56
If you want to go high end and spend extra on an ac bridge, here is one on sale. You could, in the future, add an ac access point upstairs if the 'n' connection quality is not sufficient.
post #29 of 56
I have a single story quite wide home that is not capable of extending a wireless signal in every room where I would like wifi access. The home is prewired with Cat5 in every room but I need wifi throughout the home. Does an Access Point and / or bridge allow me to simply power and connect to a wired Ethernet port in any wired room to extend wifi service on the network without changing the SSID? Ideally I would like one large network with a single SSID that devices can simply connect to from one side of the home to the other. I purchased a Netgear access point which really is a basic extender and it requires an extension to the SSID; i.e. _EXT added to the end of the SSID. My devices do not automatically connect to it, I have to manually select that SSID. Is it possible to use a router as a bridge or Access point sharing the same SSID name?

Thank you
post #30 of 56
Normally, each access point would have its own SSID. I have never messed with it, so I may be wrong, but as I understand you can have the same SSID on different access points if you designate different channels for each access point. Most router/access points allow you to designate channels. Naturally you would need the same security and key on each.
Edited by DanPackMan - 7/9/13 at 8:50am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
AVS › AVS Forum › Gaming & Content Streaming › Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming › Connecting Two Routers Possible?