Cable Modem -> hub -> 2 wireless routers Will this work?

Here is my experience, which is not that complicated. But, I had 2 wireless routers connected lan port to lan port with dhcp off on router 2 and different ssids on both. I was able to connect gs to router 1 SSID and Bs to router 2 SSID. This acted as a seemless network. Now, if I took router 1 Lan port and put it into a Wan port on router 2, I had a totally separate network on different subnets with the same gateway and had Gs on one and Bs on the other with separate SSIDs .

So talk to me..........Am I a disallusionist or just a dreamer.............

Won't work unless you have two routeable IP addresses from your ISP. Each router needs a unique IP address on the WAN side.

However, all is not lost. You can "convert" one of the routers into an access point by: 1. Ignoring the WAN port 2. disabling the DHCP server. 3. Assigning an IP address to the LAN side of the access point that is NOT the same as the other router. For example, if the "g" router is on 192.168.1.1, then the access point should be on 192.168.1.2. Then, just plug the LAN port of the "b" access point, into the LAN port of the "g" router. You may need to build or buy an ethernet crossover cable to do this.

Well, you're also one of them "top posters" that drives me insane. Actually, that's not a major accomplishment as I was already insane before you started top posting.

You're not dis-illusioned or dreaming. What you describe works. The way I described it, using one router and one access point, you get a single network with two ways to get to it via wireless.

Your scheme is two seperate wireless networks. The first wireless router, which I arbitrarily call the "g" router, connects to the internet and uses NAT to assign a network of 192.168.1.xxx to the wireless clients. The 2nd router, which I'll call the "b" router, connects its WAN port to the LAN port of the "g" router. The "b" router will have a WAN side IP address of perhaps 192.168.1.2, and a LAN side IP block of 192.168.123.xxx. Depending on the netmask on the WAN side of the "b" router, neither wireless LAN will be able to see the other. I use this for coffee shops, where I don't want the public LAN to see the office computahs. If the netmask were the usual 255.255.255.0, then the wireless clients on the "b" router will be able to see the wireless clients on the "g" router, but not the other way around.

dreamer.............

public

clients

At first I thought you were giving me a complement of being a "Top Poster" ,,,like good answers

Then I realized you dont like me posting on the top of messages. Just for you, because I admire your knowledge, I will post on the bottom or somewhere in between.

So, I am not a net mask guru, would you explain the net mask issue....I might not want my wife on her B network seeing my G stuff.

capabilities

Ah, gotcha. This is then what I'd like to set up...thinking security all the way.

The 'b' router is my TIVO router...and less secure. I figure I could set it up so that if anyone got through it, then they'd only get the TIVO and the 'net.

The 'g' router is for my computers. It has a better firewall and mac address checking.

Here is what I'd want...two networks 'b' and 'g'. I want to be able to see the 'b' with the 'g' network, but not necessarily the other way 'round. That way, I could access the 'b' network with my computers and fiddle with the TIVO...and I don't see any reason why the TIVO needs to see my computers...I could add the TIVO mac address to the list if I need to...but why? I'd also want just the router firewall protecting each network...don't want to have to punch a hole through two firewalls if I need to...that's why I thought a hub would be ideal...just a dumb connection to the net.

Suggestions, solutions?

THANKS GUYS...this is the first time I tried to set up a complicated network.

John

I never give compliments. See:

I'm honored, I think.

Ok. Typical two routers in series (double NAT) mess:

LAN #1 WAN===[Router #1]===================[Router #2]=======LAN #2 WAN = xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx WAN = 192.168.1.2 WAN NM = 255.255.255.0 WAN NM = 255.255.255.0 LAN = 192.168.1.1 LAN = 192.168.5.1 IP's = 192.168.1.xxx IP's = 192.168.5.xxx LAN NM = 255.255.255.0 LN NM = 255.255.255.0

Computers on LAN #1 cannot see any computers on LAN #2. Computers on LAN #2 can see all computers on LAN #1 Both LAN #1 and LAN #2 can see the internet. The "5" in the

If you do NOT want any of the LAN #2 computers to see the computers on LAN #1, you change the subnet mask on WAN port Netmask on Router #2 so that it only will "see" Router #1. That would look like his:

WAN = xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx WAN = 192.168.1.2 WAN NM = 255.255.255.0 WAN NM = 255.255.255.252

See my previous posting, where I posted a proposed IP layout. The only trick is the netmask on the WAN side IP port of the 2nd router should be 255.255.255.252 or 255.255.255.248.

What's a TIVO router?

Yeah. This is rediculous. There's no reason to make life complicated with double NAT and two routers. It all can be done the way I originally proposed by turning one of the routers into an access point (disable the router features) and make it all one big LAN. There's no security advantage to a double NAT system as any attack is going to come through the wireless side (LAN) and therefore bypasses all the protection of the router. The "secure" network is the one connected to the 2nd router and it's going to have some fun dealing with services that require holes in the firewall. Keep it simple. However, if internal security is important (i.e. keeping the kids and neighbors out of parts of the network) you might was well go for the double NAT method.

Thanks, now I have more etiquette

stuff.

Thanks for the explanation. It is appreciated! Plus I understand it which is hard for an Airhead.

by

Also thanks for the handy calculator.

As I am sure you know, a TIVO is a DVR for satelite, cable or OTA television. My old 'b' router's new purpose in life is to connect the TIVOs to the internet to recieve the Guide information, hense the name 'tivo router'.