need wireless connection between modem & router

I found this at the Linksys website:

No problem. Just so you know, there are LOTS of different models that are dd-wrt compatible, with the latest list available here:

That seems to be the configuration for Access Point Client mode - which operates as you say and needs a switch to connect to the end devices. But the configuration for the Wireless Repeater mode is shown here:

I haven't run across anyone using a WAP54G as an AP Client, but it certainly looks like it should work, and of course since it's a supported operating mode there would be no flashing of firmware required, further simplifying things.

I would use these instructions to configure it.

By all means, I encourage you to give that mode a try. Best case, it will meet your needs, with the caveat that you'll still likely need a switch or other device to provide additional Ethernet ports because the WAP54G only has one.

Worst case, though, wireless repeaters can be trouble prone. They have to spend half their time listening and the other half talking, minus some for overhead, so throughput really starts to be affected. I just not have had much luck with repeaters, so I'm a bit jaded. Either way, though, it's only a few clicks to switch modes. My money is still on the AP Client mode for your situation as being most reliable, but it looks like you have valid choices.

Gleeep! I didn't realize that. I was envisioning the 4 ethernet ports of a WRT54GS router. Back to square one - which may be the dd-wrt firmware flashed to a WRT54GS and using it in the Repeater Bridge mode, as in:

Thanks for all the information and education, Bill. DSL is looking better and better... :-)

Gosh, I wasn't trying to push you toward DSL! :) By all means, though, do what's best for you. I'm sure it will all work out.

On Mon, 19 Jan 2009 17:58:05 -0800, "Timothy Daniels" wrote: : Linksys's Support personnel struck out on this, but here goes: : : I have a Linksys wireless router, model no. WRT54GS, v.7. : I have a desktop, a laptop, and a printer connected to the router : via cat 5 cables running10Mb Ethernet. The router also connects : to a cable modem via cat 6 cable running 10Mb Ethernet. I want : to move the router, desktop, laptop, and printer upstairs in my condo. : The cable modem must remain downstairs where the coaxial cable : terminates because of difficulties in running a cable upstairs. (Please : just believe me.) The problem is how to link the cable modem to : the router by wirelessly simulating an Ethernet cable. Is there : a device (or devices) that can do this? : : *TimDaniels*

Yes. What you're talking about is a "wireless bridge". To construct one, you'll need two additional wireless devices: access points, not routers. WAP54G's (even old ones) will do. Configure them in bridge mode; tell each of them (via their GUI's) about the MAC address of the other; and assign them to a channel other than the one on which you want your wireless router to operate. Then connect one of them (via Ethernet cable) to your cable modem and the other (also via Ethernet cable) to the WAN side of your router. Turn them on; they should sync up automatically; and you should be fine.

Bob

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:58:21 -0800, "Timothy Daniels" : > If good, then pick up a wireless router that can run dd-wrt firmware, : > (I'm partial to the Linksys WRT54GL, but the dd-wrt website lists : > many supported models), which you would configure as a 'wireless : > client bridge'. The wireless router downstairs would be the Access Point, : > and the wireless router upstairs would be the client. The client connects : > to the AP and shares the connection via its 4 LAN ports. : : Does that mean that the only way to provide a wireless bridge : between the wireless router upstairs and the modem downstairs : is to flash a wireless router with 3rd-party firmware?

Absolutely not. Virtually any old (and I do mean old) Wireless-G access point has the capability to act as half of a bridge. Just make sure that both sides are the same model, to guard against any manufacturer-specific idiosyncracies.

Bob

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:14:41 -0600, Bill M. wrote: : If I'm following the story correctly, you're suggesting the modem will : remain downstairs and everything else (wireless router, desktop PC, : laptop, and printer) will all move upstairs. All of the equipment : upstairs would continue to be connected to the router via Cat5 cables. : : I don't think that will work since it would require the bridge to be : placed downstairs, cabled to the modem, and connecting as a client to : the router's built in Access Point. That would put the bridge on the : router's LAN, while it needs to be on the router's WAN in that case. : Swapping the router and the bridge should work, leaving the router : cabled to the modem and acting as an Access Point, and the bridge : located upstairs acting as a wireless client. Unfortunately, that : probably means you need more ports upstairs, such as you'd find on a : switch or router.

Ideally, you'd like to place the bridge on the LAN side of the router, because that's where internal IP addresses are available. If you construct the bridge out of two access points (the most straightforward method), they'll try to obtain IP addresses; and if they do, you can manage them in situ by their Port

Bob

On Sun, 25 Jan 2009 19:35:02 -0500, Robert Coe wrote: : On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:14:41 -0600, Bill M. wrote: : : If I'm following the story correctly, you're suggesting the modem will : : remain downstairs and everything else (wireless router, desktop PC, : : laptop, and printer) will all move upstairs. All of the equipment : : upstairs would continue to be connected to the router via Cat5 cables. : : : : I don't think that will work since it would require the bridge to be : : placed downstairs, cabled to the modem, and connecting as a client to : : the router's built in Access Point. That would put the bridge on the : : router's LAN, while it needs to be on the router's WAN in that case. : : Swapping the router and the bridge should work, leaving the router : : cabled to the modem and acting as an Access Point, and the bridge : : located upstairs acting as a wireless client. Unfortunately, that : : probably means you need more ports upstairs, such as you'd find on a : : switch or router. : : Ideally, you'd like to place the bridge on the LAN side of the router, because : that's where internal IP addresses are available. If you construct the bridge : out of two access points (the most straightforward method), they'll try to : obtain IP addresses; and if they do, you can manage them in situ by their Port : 90 GUIs.

A typo. It's port 80 (Web interface).

: But once it's been set up, a bridge doesn't need much management, so : the additional convenience may not be worth the hassle. That said, it's easy : enough to locate the router downstairs with the modem and generate your : additional ports with a mini-hub connected to the upstairs end of the bridge. : That's what I did, and it works fine. (I *haven't* been able to get my cable : modem to work yet, but that's an entirely separate issue.) : : Bob

I believe this is what you mean:

Can't you just buy a wireless card for the pc?

Dan

An Access Point may do what you want. You will need to buy two access points nad they will both HAVE to be LinkSys brand! An access point, setup in Bridge mode, is basically what you want, a wireless connection plugged into one thing, usually a router, and then the other end plugged into something else, usually a switch or hub. The two access points talk amongst themselves, creating a wireless Bridge between the 2 wired devices.

Not necessarily, i used to have a standard netgear router hooked up to my cable modem, and then a dd-wrt linksys router which acted as a client to the netgear one. I think its called 'Client Mode Wireless', check it out on their website

Dan

Sorry i think i gave the wrong link

Sorry i think i gave the wrong link

Dan

I believe ya, dude.

Why can't you just hook a wireless router up to the modem with Cat5 (Most have wired connections as well as wireless) and get a wireless card for your PCs? You wouldn't have to run any wire, and any additional investment would be minimal.