Moving Wireless router away from Cable Modem - Using a second Router - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 3Likes
  • 1 Post By funhouse69
  • 1 Post By smitbret
  • 1 Post By smitbret
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 12 Old 11-22-2014, 07:26 PM - Thread Starter
Member
 
splat10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 10
Moving Wireless router away from Cable Modem - Using a second Router

My cable modem is located with my desktop in a far corner of my house and i get pretty poor reception in the areas that i'm in most with my wireless router (Linksys WRT160n V3 running dd-wrt). I have a cat6 line from my router to my home theater which would locate the wireless connection in a much better location. I could just fish a new cable line to that location also but I'd rather not if possible.

I have an old WRT54G router that i'd like to use as the DHCP server at the modem and just use the 160 as the WAP and switch for the Home theater components (TV, BR, Dish, and Amp). I know how to do all this including turning off the wifi in the 54 and setting the 160 to an access point (let me know if i'm wrong because i could be  ).

My question is will i see a performance degradation with the setup since the 54 is ancient? It's still a 10/100 wired router so it should work the same right?Almost all of my traffic will have to flow through both routers (yes i know the 160 would not actually be a "router") so will that have any impact on performance?
splat10 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 02:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
funhouse69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,163
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 484 Post(s)
Liked: 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by splat10 View Post
My cable modem is located with my desktop in a far corner of my house and i get pretty poor reception in the areas that i'm in most with my wireless router (Linksys WRT160n V3 running dd-wrt). I have a cat6 line from my router to my home theater which would locate the wireless connection in a much better location. I could just fish a new cable line to that location also but I'd rather not if possible.

I have an old WRT54G router that i'd like to use as the DHCP server at the modem and just use the 160 as the WAP and switch for the Home theater components (TV, BR, Dish, and Amp). I know how to do all this including turning off the wifi in the 54 and setting the 160 to an access point (let me know if i'm wrong because i could be ).

My question is will i see a performance degradation with the setup since the 54 is ancient? It's still a 10/100 wired router so it should work the same right?Almost all of my traffic will have to flow through both routers (yes i know the 160 would not actually be a "router") so will that have any impact on performance?
What do you have for a Cable Modem? Is it a Router or just a Modem? Does it have a built in switch?

Nevertheless This would work and it shouldn't slow anything down at all as long as you don't have anything connected to the Router at the Modem end as its only 100mb/sec as opposed to Gig on the other end.

If there isn't anything else connected at the Modem end then why not just connect the Cable you already have ran from the modem room to the Modem itself then to your Router in the room you want to move it to? Eliminate the second router completely if possible.

There isn't anything wrong with going from Switch to Switch to Switch, its done all the time and almost no performance hit whatsoever.

No matter what just make sure that you only have one device running DHCP so you don't end up with any duplicate IP Addresses which will cause endless headaches.
AlbertRalph95 likes this.
funhouse69 is offline  
post #3 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 06:35 AM
Advanced Member
 
smitbret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: East Idaho - Pocatello
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 325 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by splat10 View Post
My cable modem is located with my desktop in a far corner of my house and i get pretty poor reception in the areas that i'm in most with my wireless router (Linksys WRT160n V3 running dd-wrt). I have a cat6 line from my router to my home theater which would locate the wireless connection in a much better location. I could just fish a new cable line to that location also but I'd rather not if possible.

I have an old WRT54G router that i'd like to use as the DHCP server at the modem and just use the 160 as the WAP and switch for the Home theater components (TV, BR, Dish, and Amp). I know how to do all this including turning off the wifi in the 54 and setting the 160 to an access point (let me know if i'm wrong because i could be  ).

My question is will i see a performance degradation with the setup since the 54 is ancient? It's still a 10/100 wired router so it should work the same right?Almost all of my traffic will have to flow through both routers (yes i know the 160 would not actually be a "router") so will that have any impact on performance?
Or why not just set the WRT160n as the main router at the Theater? I don't understand why you even need the WRT54G.

There's nothing wrong with setting up the WRT54G at the modem, but it probably won't provide any benefits to you and just creates another potential point of failure in your network.
smitbret is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 09:01 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
splat10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I have my desktop at the modem which is also running my media server so I need to keep it wired in. I also need all four ports on the 160 to wire my devices at the ht as wireless performance streaming isn't good enough. My cable modem is just a modem and I got it 7 years ago when I moved into this house. Would it be worth my time to go change it out at time Warner?

I have to have the router at the modem setup as the dhcp server right? I'm worried that the 54g will not work as well as the 160.

I guess i should just try it and if I don't like it I'll just move the modem to the ht and use the existing cat 6 to feed the desktop
splat10 is offline  
post #5 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 09:26 AM
Advanced Member
 
smitbret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: East Idaho - Pocatello
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 325 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by splat10 View Post
I have my desktop at the modem which is also running my media server so I need to keep it wired in. I also need all four ports on the 160 to wire my devices at the ht as wireless performance streaming isn't good enough. My cable modem is just a modem and I got it 7 years ago when I moved into this house. Would it be worth my time to go change it out at time Warner?

I have to have the router at the modem setup as the dhcp server right? I'm worried that the 54g will not work as well as the 160.

I guess i should just try it and if I don't like it I'll just move the modem to the ht and use the existing cat 6 to feed the desktop
Cool, that is a solid reason.

Yeah, just turn wireless off on the WRT54G and set up the 160 as an AP near the theater. It should work fine. The WRT54G was the standard back in the day but will certainly be the limiting factor at this point. The ports are 10/100 and should work fine as a switch at those speeds but Smallnetbuilder's review from back in 2005 says the WAN -> LAN speed was about 20mbps, so don't bother paying for internet that's faster than that. That just tells us that it really lacks the HP to work with more up to date network setups. The WRT160N will push 60+ which is still fairly low but adequate for now.

If it were me, I would seriously consider moving the WRT160N to main router duty and drop $20 on one of these for an AP at the Theater:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-039-_-Product

Really though, the WRT160n is fine as an AP and if you can budget slightly higher, replace the WRT54G with one of these:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833704144

or

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833162086
splat10 likes this.

Last edited by smitbret; 11-23-2014 at 09:33 AM.
smitbret is offline  
post #6 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 09:50 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
splat10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 10
excellent, thank you. My modem is a Toshiba PCX2500 which google tells me has a max transfer rate of 43 mbps and is on 10mbps networking. I don't do a lot of streaming and don't have any problems with 1080 youtube or vimeo so i think i'm fine on that end right now.

I'm planning on a building a media server soon and ripping all my dvd's to it so i want ot make sure that i have the LAN transfer rates capable of doing it. Sound's like i'll contemplate 2 new routers at that time that are both gigabit with better WLAN capability as bad range is the problem i'm trying to solve right now.

Is there any performance gain to be had by installing dd-wrt on the 54g?

Thanks again

Quote:
Originally Posted by smitbret View Post
Cool, that is a solid reason.

Yeah, just turn wireless off on the WRT54G and set up the 160 as an AP near the theater. It should work fine. The WRT54G was the standard back in the day but will certainly be the limiting factor at this point. The ports are 10/100 and should work fine as a switch at those speeds but Smallnetbuilder's review from back in 2005 says the WAN -> LAN speed was about 20mbps, so don't bother paying for internet that's faster than that. That just tells us that it really lacks the HP to work with more up to date network setups. The WRT160N will push 60+ which is still fairly low but adequate for now.

If it were me, I would seriously consider moving the WRT160N to main router duty and drop $20 on one of these for an AP at the Theater:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-039-_-Product

Really though, the WRT160n is fine as an AP and if you can budget slightly higher, replace the WRT54G with one of these:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833704144

or

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16833162086
splat10 is offline  
post #7 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 10:09 AM - Thread Starter
Member
 
splat10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Liked: 10
so i haven't paid much attention to my internet bill. Did notice it went up but just thought that was TW being TW. Nope, $6/month lease on the modem. I'm going to take care of this whole thing right now and buy a modem with a switch. Recommendations? Here's the list from TW.
D-Link DCM301
Motorola SB6141
Motorola SBG6580
Motorola SBG6782AC
Netgear C3000-100NAS
Netgear C3700-100NAS
Netgear CM400
Netgear N450 CG3000Dv2
Zoom 5341J
Zoom 5350
Zoom 5352
Zoom 5363
ZyXEL CDA30360
splat10 is offline  
post #8 of 12 Old 11-23-2014, 11:06 AM
Advanced Member
 
smitbret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: East Idaho - Pocatello
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 325 Post(s)
Liked: 101
Quote:
Originally Posted by splat10 View Post
so i haven't paid much attention to my internet bill. Did notice it went up but just thought that was TW being TW. Nope, $6/month lease on the modem. I'm going to take care of this whole thing right now and buy a modem with a switch. Recommendations? Here's the list from TW.
D-Link DCM301
Motorola SB6141
Motorola SBG6580
Motorola SBG6782AC
Netgear C3000-100NAS
Netgear C3700-100NAS
Netgear CM400
Netgear N450 CG3000Dv2
Zoom 5341J
Zoom 5350
Zoom 5352
Zoom 5363
ZyXEL CDA30360
The D-Link, NetGear CM400, Zoom 5341J, ZyXEL CDA30360 and the SB6141 are out since they only have the 1 LAN port and act as modems, not router combos. You'd have to add another router at the modem. The Zoom 5363 is for people that also want to get cable phone service.

The Netgear c3xxx look interesting but only have 2 LAN ports. They will work, but if you want to add more devices at the router you'll have to add an additional switch.

The Motorola SBG6580 is kind of the industry standard right now so if you have issues, you'll probably find more and better support out there. The Motorola SBG6782AC is pretty much the same thing but with wireless AC which you'll probably find useless in the location you have it. NetGear is a very popular brand as well.

So basically, it would come down to the SBG6580, Zoom 5352 or the Netgear N450 CG3000Dv2 for me. I don't think it will make much difference for performance. The $16 price difference between the Zoom and the other 2 is probably just a reflection of brand popularity. Zoom isn't unknown, but not nearly as well known as Motorola, NetGear, Arris or even Zyxel.

Incidentally, I had a Motorola SB6141 for about three months before it went and my ISP replaced it with another SB6141. The 2nd one ran fine for about 8 more months till I got tired of the $5/month lease fee and I picked up an SB6121 on sale for like $52 at Officemax one day. It's been fine for over a year.
splat10 likes this.

Last edited by smitbret; 11-23-2014 at 11:30 AM.
smitbret is offline  
post #9 of 12 Old 12-25-2014, 10:56 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rebkell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 5,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 417 Post(s)
Liked: 287
I've got comcast for internet and I just noticed my modem lease went up to $9.00 a month, that's ridiculous. I need to get my own modem, I'm not worried about the wireless part, just the modem. I'm thinking about the Motorola SB6141, anyone have any good or bad stories about that modem or good recommendations?

I'd like to keep the price range under $100 and they have the 6141 at Amazon for right at $90 with Prime shipping.
rebkell is offline  
post #10 of 12 Old 12-26-2014, 06:27 AM
Advanced Member
 
tdallen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Somewhere south of Boston...
Posts: 589
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 198 Post(s)
Liked: 64
My 6141 worked well for me until Comcast switched me to an Arris as part of my X1 upgrade.
tdallen is offline  
post #11 of 12 Old 12-26-2014, 06:31 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Skytrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baden, Pa.
Posts: 1,279
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 410 Post(s)
Liked: 395
Rebkell, I had the 6141 for quite a while and it works quite well. 9$ a month is ridiculous. You will have to call Comcast to get it set up.

TV - LG 65B7P OLED / Receiver - Yamaha RX-A1040 7.2 / Blu Ray - Oppo BDP-83 / Turntable - Technics SL-3300 / Cable Box - Comcast X1 V4 4K /L & R Paradigm Studio 20 V3
Center - Paradigm CC-470 V3 / 4 Surrounds - Paradigm SA-15 V3 In Walls
Subwoofer 1 - Sunfire HRS-12 / Subwoofer 2 - Paradigm PW-2100
Skytrooper is offline  
post #12 of 12 Old 12-26-2014, 11:10 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
rebkell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 5,108
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 417 Post(s)
Liked: 287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skytrooper View Post
Rebkell, I had the 6141 for quite a while and it works quite well. 9$ a month is ridiculous. You will have to call Comcast to get it set up.
Ordered it today, Hope it doesn't take too long to get it working, I go through withdrawal without internet. LOL I should get it in Tuesday. I've heard some of the modems need to get a firmware update, I'm trying to figure out how to optimize the setup time as much as possible.
rebkell is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Networking, Media Servers & Content Streaming

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