Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router

Have a question or want to start a discussion? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
I read an article that indicated a secondary router can be daisy-chained of
f of a primary router.  For example, as follows:
(a) a cable modem's internet port is connected to router-1's internet port.
(b) router-2's internet port is connected to one of router-1's ethernet por
ts.

I'm far from sophisticated in these matters, but this seems logically feasi
ble to me.  What I don't know is whether or not this same procedure would w
ork with an access point being used in place of router-2.

Any guidance provided will be much appreciated.

Thanks,
?Thri

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 02:26:53 -0700 (PDT), Thri Cipio

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes.  It will work.  (If router-1 also includes an access point, I
would recommend using a different SSID (network name) for the second
access point.)

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
wrote:  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Why?

I have two APs in the house, both using the same SSID (on diffferent
channels) without problems.  

--  
bert@iphouse.com    St. Paul, MN

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Various reasons...  some just personal preference.  In your case, can
you tell which one your are connected to?  I found myself using the
weak signal from the farthest router when the closer one was right
nearby.  I guess it depends on your situation and why you have 2
routers in the first place.  In the case of the original poster, the
one was a more public system that was intended to be used by other
apartments in addition to his.  The 2nd router was intended to be just
his.  That story is still evolving so we will see where it ends up.

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
wrote:  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

On my phone running Android OS, I have an app which will show me. On my
iPad, not directly.  

However, the iPad's a lot more eager to switch to the strongest signal
on its own than is the phone. I have to turn WiFi off and back on again
to get the phone to switch. When the phone's connected to the "wrong"
AP, the signal strength display makes it pretty obvious.  

Quoted text here. Click to load it

APs, not routers.

I have two because the layout of the house requires it.

--  
bert@iphouse.com    St. Paul, MN

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

True, but to most people I know, it's a router.  The AP is built in.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 6:42:01 AM UTC-4, Pat wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Pat--

Thanks for your reply.  It is most helpful.  I have a follow-up question th
at pertains to the context for my original question.  If you're pressed for
 time, just skip to the end for that question.  Otherwise, here's the . . .

CONTEXT: In my scenario, I'm not the one who has control over the Access Po
int (AP).  The AP is one among a few dozen apartment building Access Points
 that are collectively managed by the building's ISP. Previously, I had sim
ply replaced the ISP-provided AP with my own (non-AP) router, in order to h
ave control over my own internet connection.  Subsequently, I learned that  
the AP in *my* apartment is *not* necessarily the one servicing my apartmen
t.  That is, demand within the building is load-balanced among all the Acce
ss Points.  So, disconnecting it and swapping in my own router turned out t
o be problematic from the ISP's point of view.  Therefore, I have removed m
y router and swapped back in the AP.  But, of course, that means I once aga

m trying to do is regain that control without interfering with (and ideally
, without being visible to) the AP that's associated with the cable modem i
n my apartment.  Hence, my . . .

FOLLOW-UP QUESTION:  If I daisy-chain the AP off of my own router, will thi
s be apparent to the ISP personnel monitoring the building's access points?
  In other words, will the AP be able to detect (and show) that its connect
ion to the modem involves an intermediary connection through my router?

Once again, thanks for your original reply and thanks (to you and whoever e
lse may want to chime in) for whatever further help you may be able to prov
ide.

Gratefully,
--Thri


Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 09:32:39 -0700 (PDT), Thri Cipio

Quoted text here. Click to load it

.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

A very interesting situation...  I believe the ISP could tell your
router was in there if they wanted to.  They could run a utility to
trace packets and see that another hop was in there.  But, if your
router is running properly, why would they care to check.  On the
other hand, anyone outside your apartment that happens to use their
original AP would be on your network with the resulting security
risks.  Perhaps that is what the second router is used for in your
original post.  The first router could maintain a network for
connecting the AP and router-2.  Router-2 would be your private
internal network.  If that is the case, maybe you should use a simple
"switch" device to share the incoming signal between the AP and your
router.  (A 4 or 5 port switch can be purchased for much less than a
full blown router.)  If you do end up with 2 routers, you need to pay
attention to which ports are open in router-1.  Otherwise you might
end up blocking some ports that the ISP intends to have open.  A
nearby neighbor might find that his or her security camera's remote
access feature works sometimes but not other times depending on if he
connects to "your" AP that is behind router-1 or another one nearby.

Pat
  

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
Pat?
 
Thanks for your reply.
 
I've split your reply

tion?
 
On Monday, August 22, 2016 at 2:38:35 PM UTC-4

SP could tell your router was
> in there if they wanted
to.  They could run a utility to
> trace packets and see
 that another hop was in there.  But, if your
> router i
s running properly, why would they care to check.
??
???????????????????
???????????????????
?????????????????
Well
, this is encouraging.  It sounds like they'd have to go
out of their way to look for some trouble-shooting-relate

ther hand, anyone outside your apartment
> that happens
to [be using the AP inside your apartment] would be on
>
 your network with the resulting security risks.
???
?????????????????????
?????????????????????
??????????????????
Hmmm?



> router is used for in your original
> post.  The fir

st router could maintain a network for
> connecting the
AP and router-2.
?????????????
???????????????????
???????????????????
??????
Two clarification points here:
-----
 
(1) The first router ("router-1") is my own router.  It
 would connect directly to the cable modem and would have
 its own pasword-protected SSID. It would be this SSID th
at I personally would wirelessly connect my devices to; e
.g., computer, smartphone, roku, etc.
-----
(2) You ref
er to "connecting the AP and router-2" but note, in my sc
enario, the "AP" and "router-2" are one and the same devi
ce.  In other words, we're talking about a total of three
 devices: [cable modem] <--- [router-1/(my router)] <---

uter-2 would be your private internal network.
???
???????????????????
???????????????????
????????????????
No, rou
ter-1 would service my private, wireless LAN and connect


d use a simple
> "switch" device to share the incoming s
ignal between the AP and your
> router.  (A 4 or 5 port
switch can be purchased for much less than a
> full blow
n router.)
???????????????
???????????????????
???????????????????
????
Well, this is interesting.  I had looked at
 switches online but came away with the impression that a
 "switch" is used to *switch* between ports; i.e., only o
ne port could be active at a time and the switch is used
to select which port would be active at any given time.


outers, you need to pay
> attention to which ports are o
pen in router-1.  Otherwise you might
> end up blocking
some ports that the ISP intends to have open.
????
?????????????????????
?????????????????????
?????????????????
I unders
tand what you're saying but have no idea how to determine
 which "ports that the ISP intends to have open."  Is the
re a way for me to find this out?
 
 
Pat, I hope that w
asn't overly long-winded and that it helps clarify my que
stions.  Any further clarification you can provide will b
e very much appreciated.
 
Thanks again for your help.

 
Gratefully,
?Thri

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
Thri,
I will try to answer below just like you did...

On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 13:31:01 -0700 (PDT), Thri Cipio


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it
I understand now, but I don't think you want to do it that way.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Since the building AP (and router 2) is connected to router-1, anyone
using the building AP is connected to your private network.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it
But, it isn't private since the building AP is connected to it.  The
wireless part of router-1 is protected by WAP2 or whatever you use,
but the building AP is connected to one of router-1's Ethernet ports
and therefore, your private network.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it
That is, essentially, what switches do.  In this case, I think it is
what you want.  The upside of the switch is connected to the incomming
line.  One of the output lines goes to the ISP's AP thereby providing
its original function for others in the building.  The second output
from the switch supplies Internet to your router which provides your
private (wired and wireless) network.

I noticed you said cable modem.  If that means your incoming service
is via coax rather than Ethernet, then everything I have said changes.
You can't just add a switch like I previously suggested.  I had
thought the ISP provided AP was a standalone AP feed with an Ethernet
cable.  If, however, the ISP supplied AP is really what you called
router-2 and is fed with cable (coax), then my recommendation changes.
Does the ISP provided device have Ethernet connectors that can feed
wired devices?  if so, connect your (previously called router-1)
router to one of those connectors.  That way you don't need to know
anything about how the ISP handles ports and you have a private
network using your own router.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it


I hope I haven't totally confused you.  To go further, I need to
understand exactly what you have.  Is the cable modem a separate
device from the ISP supplied router/AP or are all three functions in
one box?  Either way, what connectors are used for the existing
connections.  (Note that the word "port" can get confusing here.  It
can refer to a physical connection - for example, the ethernet ports
on the back of a switch.  Or, it can be the part of the Internet
Protocol Address controlled by software to separate messages - for
example, web requests are usually made by your browser using port 80).

Pat
  

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
Pat?
 
Thanks for your latest reply, which clarified a
 lot.  And sorry about the bit of a delay with the arriva
l of this response.
 
Anyway, to proceed . . .
 
On Tue
sday, August 23, 2016 at 8:55:14 AM UTC-4, Pat wrote:
 


is connected to router-1, anyone
> using the building AP
 is connected to your private network.  
> The wireless p
art of router-1 is protected by WAP2 or whatever you use,

> but the building AP is connected to one of router-1's

 Ethernet ports
> and therefore, your private network.

???????????????????
???????????????????
???????????????????
 
So, does this mean that if all my connections to router
-1 (my own router) from my various devices, are wireless
connections, then my privacy will be secure (via WAP2, et

dem.  If that means your incoming service
> is via coax
rather than Ethernet, then everything I have said changes
.
> You can't just add a switch like I previously sugges

ted. ? If?the ISP
> supplied AP is really what you c
alled
> router-2 and is fed with cable (coax), then my r

ecommendation changes.
???????????
???????????????????
???????????????????
????????
Pat, you've cracked the code!  
Sorry I failed to be sufficiently clear in my previous po
sts.  To further clarify . . .
Yes, the ISP has provided
 two pieces of equipment: (1) a cable modem, and (2) a wi
reless router with AP capability (or put conversely, an A

?
> Does the ISP provided device have Ethernet connector

s that can feed
> wired devices?
????????
?????????????????????
?????????????????????
?????????????
Assuming you're refe
rring to (2) above, the ISP-provided AP/router has no RJ4
5 receptors (female jacks).  It has only a single cat5 ca
ble protruding from the device and terminating into a mal
e RJ45 jack which is plugged into the one and only female
 RJ45 jack integrated into the back of the cable modem.  
This is why I cannot daisy-chain my own router off of the

y you don't need to know
> anything about how the ISP ha
ndles ports and you have a private
> network using your
own router.
???????????????
????????????????????
????????????????????
?????
Well, possibly some good news hear.  Since
 my last post, I've spoken with a member of the team that
 provides telephone tech support and they gave me the por
ts that their AP/router keeps open: two for http and http
s, and one each for NTP and DNS.  They said they shut dow


t you have.  Is the cable modem a separate
> device from
 the ISP supplied router/AP??
????????
???????????????????
???????????????????


ting
> connections.
????????????

????????????????????
????????????????????
????????
Ditto: see #3.
 
 
Well, I guess
 that's as much as I can describe for now.  I hope this c
larifies things, but if not, feel free to ask for more ex
planation.
 
Thanks again for your continued interest an
d ongoing assistance.  It really is very much appreciated
.
 
Gratefully,
?Thri


Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
Good Morning Thri,
Your responses have clarified a lot for me, too.  If I understand
correctly, The ISP supplied router/AP has only one RJ45 connector -
and that is the one used to connect to the cable modem.  So, it can
only "route" to wifi attached devices.  I see two possibilities for
you:

1.  Add a simple switch between the cable modem and the ISP's
router/AP.  Then connect your router to a second port on the switch.
The problem with this approach is the cable modem may not allow this
type of connection.  The only way to know is to try it.  The cable
modem may be programmed to allow only one connected device on its low
side - their supplied router/AP.

2.  Leave the ISP provided equipment exactly as it was but buy a
bridge device to connect to the ISP's AP wirelessly and provide a
single RJ45 to connect your router.  I have used IOGear's model GWU627
bridge in the past.  That is just one of many devices available to
perform the bridge function.

modem<-->router/AP <-wifi-> Bridge<-->YourRouter/AP-- your devices*

* your devices connect only to your router and can be wired or wifi  

I hope that helps,
Pat


Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
On Wednesday, August 24, 2016 at 7:35:54 AM UTC-4, Pat wr
ote:
 
Pat?
 
Thanks for your quick reply and the fur
ther clarification and suggestions it provides.
 
I do h
ave some further, related comments and questions as follo

tly, The ISP-supplied router/AP has only one RJ45 connect
or -
> and that is the one used to connect to the cable
modem.  So, it can
> only "route" to wifi attached devic
es.
??????????????????
?????????????????????
?????????????????????

could] add a simple switch between the cable modem and th
e ISP's
> router/AP.  Then connect your router to a seco
nd port on the switch.
???????????
???????????????????
???????????????????
????????
I thought you indicated in your
 previous post to me that a switch will not work if the f
eed to the ISP-supplied router/AP is coming from a cable

The problem with this approach is [that their] cable mode
m may ?
> be programmed to allow only one connected de
vice on its low side
> - their supplied router/AP.
??
?????????????????????
?????????????????????
???????????????????
Pe
rhaps this is the clarification to my confusion mentioned
 directly above.  In any case, it may be worth recalling
that we already know the modem will accept a router other
 than "their supplied router/AP" because my initial appro
ach was to simply substitute my own (non-AP) router for t
heir router/AP unit; i.e., I had unplugged their router/A
P and plugged in my own (non-AP) router in its place.
 


ed equipment exactly as it was but buy a
> bridge device
 to connect to the ISP's AP wirelessly and provide a
> s
ingle RJ45 to connect your router.  ?
> --------------


---  
> * your devices connect only to your router and ca
n be wired or wifi  
????????????
????????????????????
????????????????????
????????
So, in this scenario, the wireles
s bridge would have an integrated female RJ45 socket, int
o which I would plug my own (non-AP) router... right?  An
d from their, my own devices would connect to my router v
ia cat5 or wifi... right?
---------------
So a couple (
or few) related questions . . .
(a)  Would the ISP-suppl
ied router/AP be able to "see" my downstream devices; i.e
., my bridge and/or my router?  An would these be noticea
ble to the ISP administrators even without them going out
 of their way to look for anything unusual?
(b)  Since m
y router (and it's connected devices) would be downstream
 from their router/AP, would they retain their ability to
 filter out certain types of traffic resulting from softw
are running on one of my connected devices; for example,
peer-to-peer file-sharing software?
(c)  What are the pr
ivacy/security implications of this arrangement?  Would t
he wireless connections between my router and my devices

UT NOT LEAST . . .
---------------
Why are we no longer
 considering the originally proposed (and asked about) sc
enario in which my (non-AP) router would cat5-connect to
the ISP-supplied modem and then the ISP-supplied router/A


??? my (non-AP) router ??? ISP-supplied router/

 because their modem "may be programmed to allow only one
 connected device on its low side?"  And if the word, "ma
y" is still operative, then maybe (as with a wifi-bridge)
 it's still worth a try; i.e., maybe the modem is *not* p
rogrammed to allow only one downstream device.  What say
thee?
 
 
Well, Pat, I guess that's it for now on my end
.  As always, your continued interest and help are very m
uch appreciated.
 
?Thri

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
Responses embedded below...


On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:56:23 -0700 (PDT), Thri Cipio

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

At first, I thought you had cat5 coming in to your apartment so I
suggested the possibility of a switch.  Then I learned you have coax
cable coming in so a switch would not work.  Then I learned your cable
modem had one cat5 output that feeds a separate AP/router.  So, a
switch is, once again, possible.

Quoted text here. Click to load it


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Good point.  You are correct.  However, they may not permit two device
connected to the cable modem simultaniously.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes.


Yes.

I don't think they would see your devices without going out of their
way to look.  Your bridge and router would just look like any other
device connected to their wifi.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Your router would retain all of its abilities to protect your private
network.  However, I iknow very little about peer-to-peer file sharing
so I can't help you there.

Yes.  Your wireless connections would be secured by wpa if that is how
you set up your router.
Quoted text here. Click to load it



Because doing so puts anyone outside your apartment (using the ISP
supplied AP) in to your private network.  That causes lot of security
problems.  The network below your router is supposed to be your
private network.  The only way to use it should be via wifi (which is
wpa protected) or wired (which you can physically see).  If you
connect the ISP's AP there, you are opening your private network to
anyone who knows the ISP's password.  That outside person could trace
and see all your messages.


Quoted text here. Click to load it
No.  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Don't let unknown people on to your private network!
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
Another extended delay in my response . . . sorry 'bout that.  Pat, I hope  
you're still checking out this thread.  I think it will probably be my last
 substantive post on this topic, although maybe I'll chime in with some epi
logue content, once I've tried out one of your suggestions.

Inline response follows . . .

Quoted text here. Click to load it
t)
Quoted text here. Click to load it
ied  
Quoted text here. Click to load it
r as >> follows:


Quoted text here. Click to load it
??? ISP-supplied router/AP


Quoted text here. Click to load it
?????????
??????????
?????????
?????????
??????????
?????????
???????
I think I finally understand what you've been trying to tell me  ?  
I can be a little dense sometimes.  What was throwing me off was thinking t
hat if all my devices were communicating through my router using WPA-protec
ted Wifi, then I'd be secure as long an no one had access to my password-pr
otected SSID.  Now I see that this would protect me against only those tryi
ng to get to my router wirelessly.  It would offer me no protection against
 anyone getting to my router through a wired connection, which is exactly w
hat the case would be with the ISP-supplied router/AP cat5-connected to my  
router.

So, as you suggested, I think I'll try getting a simple 4- or 5-port switch
 through Amazon.  If it doesn't work, I can always return it.  I appeciated
 your earlier mention of a decent wireless bridge; likewise, do you have an
y thoughts on a make/model for a decent switch?

In any case, thanks again so much for all your help . . . and patience!  It
's been practically very useful and more generally, a real plus in terms of
 my general conception of what's going on (in a basic sort of way) with loc
al area networking.

Again, very much appreciated.

Gratefully,
?Thri

Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router

On Sat, 27 Aug 2016 21:34:44 -0700 (PDT), Thri Cipio

Hi Thri,
I am just now seeing this message.  It looks like you sent it days
ago, but I missed it then.


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Switches are very inexpensive.  You can probably find one at a local
store for $20 - $25.  Places like BestBuy and even Walmart have them.
(I am assuming you are in the US).    

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You are welcome.  I get lots of help from others on these groups so I
don't mind passing it on.  I am sure you will do the same for someone
else.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
Good luck,
Pat


Re: Daisy-chaining an Access Point Off of a Wireless Router
On Wednesday, August 31, 2016 at 9:27:36 AM UTC-4, Pat wr
ote:
> Hi Thri,
> I am just now seeing this message.  I

t looks like you sent it days
> ago, but I missed it the
n.
??????????????????
????????????????????
????????????????????
??
No problemo, Pat.  I appreciate that you saw it at
all and took the time to reply.
 
 
 
> Switches are ver
y inexpensive.  You can probably find one at a local
> s
tore for $20 - $25.  Places like BestBuy and even Walmart
 have them.
> (I am assuming you are in the US).    
?
???????????????????
???????????????????
??????????????????
I
 located one on Amazon for ~$25: http://bit.ly/TL-SG105 ?
?? made by TP-LINK.  I'll go that route since I get free
shipping with my "Prime" membership.
 
 
 
>> On Sat, 27
 Aug 2016 21:34:44 -0700 (PDT), Thri Cipio
>> In any cas
e, thanks again so much for all your help . . .  
>  
> Y
ou are welcome.  I get lots of help from others on these
groups so I
> don't mind passing it on.  I am sure you w
ill do the same for someone
> else.
???????
?????????????????????
?????????????????????
??????????????
I certainly will.
  And I like to think our exchange here will ? thanks t
o your knowledge and experience ? help others also.  To
ward that end (as well as to satisfy any lingering curios
ity you may have as to how this turns out for me), I'll p
ost the results of hooking up the switch in my particular
 environment.  It would be great if it works!
 
________



ch for all your help.
 
?Thri
 


Site Timeline