Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.internet.wireless    |    Fun with wireless Internet access    |    55,960 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 55,183 of 55,960    |
|    dan to Char Jackson    |
|    Re: How do I turn a spare router into a     |
|    04 Mar 23 00:07:54    |
      XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-10       From: nospam@nospam.com              On Fri, 03 Mar 2023 17:27:21 -0600, Char Jackson wrote:                     >>> how would I turn the old router from routing into a "dumb" switch?       >>       >>disabling DHCP, making sure its IP addr doesn't clash with the new       >>router, not using the WAN port, link one of it's LAN ports to one of the       >>new router's LAN ports just about covers it, enable or disable wifi to suit.       >       > I agree with Andy, but just wanted to add a bit of additional detail to       > the DHCP step.              Thanks because I don't know what I'm doing so I appreciate the advice.              I didn't realize until it was said above that I could not only get three or       four extra LAN ports out of the spare router by using it as a dumb switch,       but also the 5GHz and 2GHz wi-fi access points. I didn't think of that.              That means my options for re-use of the old router seem to be these in       order of what I presume would be the complexity and risk of the setup.       [1] switch + AP (gets 3 or 4 ports + the 5GHz & 2GHz access points)       [2] wired repeater (full speed) physically wired to the gateway router       [3] wireless repeater (half speed) over the air to the gateway router       [4] wireless client bridge + AP over the air to the gateway router        (or over the air to any AP)              The switch idea is good because you always need more ports near the gateway       router. The wired repeater is probably too much of a pain to physically       wire set up far from the gateway router because I don't want to drill holes       in walls and ceilings and the like just to make good use of a spare router.              The wireless repeater is easier to set up far from the gateway router but       it's half speed at best. And the wireless client bridge seems to be similar       to the wireless repeater. I'm not exactly sure the difference.              But I'll start with the switch plus the access points.              > On the new router, adjust the DHCP scope to carve out the IP address       > that you want to use for the old router, for example 192.168.1.2. So on       > the new router, the DHCP scope would change from       > 192.168.1.2 - 192.168.1.254 to       > 192.168.1.3 - 192.168.1.254.              I was wondering about that because my phone is set to a static IP address       in the same range that the DHCP "scope" (using your word) is and it works.              > (Intentionally written that way to illustrate that 192.168.1.2 has been       > removed from the DHCP scope.) That way, DHCP on the new router has no       > opportunity to assign that IP to any other node.              Thanks. I understand that you're saying to make the switch + AP on an IP       address which is static and which is not handed out by the main router DHCP       process.              > Then on the old router, manually assign 192.168.1.2 as its LAN IP, (its       > WAN IP will remain blank and its WAN port will remain unused).              I guess any conflict would most likely happen if/when the newly added       switch + AP is offline, but in general, it's not likely to be offline.              > Insert, here, a note that if you're going to enable WiFi on both the old       > router and the new router, if both are so equipped, separate the two       > routers so that their radios aren't right next to each other.              That's the thing that is making me wonder if there's something else I       should do with the spare router because the physical connection to the main       gateway router means it has to be close (I'm not going to be cabling the       walls).              And if it's close, then it's merely duplicating the existing coverage by       the wireless access points. Better to put it farther away to get better       coverage in the house, but a wired repeater is out of the question because       it's too much work to run cabling.              That leaves only a wireless repeater + AP or a wireless client bridge + AP       where I'm googling now to see if they're actually different or the same.              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca