I got a Linksys wireless router. I have a network with 30 machines with static IPs - 192.168.128.1 through 192.168.128.255. I'm plugging wireless router into the wired switch through port 1. Wireless computers connect to the new wireless network, but they just sit there, no Internet, no network.
This is what I did. I got two of these routers. On router I stupidly connected from "Internet" port into Port 1 of one of the hubs ... and it worked! People have been going in and out, connecting wirelessly and enjoying their fast wireless connection ... but no network.
The other one (about a mile away) I decided to plug exactly the same way ... Didn't work. I them connected the router from Port 1 to Port 1 on a switch ... Didn't work. I then connected to the router from my laptop, used broswer config, set up its IP (192.168.1.2), turned ON the DHCP .... everyone connects fine TO THE ROUTER, but no Internet, no connectivity.
I would like to have this router hand out IPs automatically and give people access to my network and the Internet. I really don't care what IPs it hands out ... as long as people can play with my files and get online.
Are you wanting the wireless network to be part of 192.168.128.x or a different network?
If I'm reading you right, you are trying to have the wireless part of the same network -- basically just using the wireless router as an access point only by feeding one of it's LAN ports and not WAN (?). If so, just make sure the wireless router's DHCP is disabled, and then just set it's WAN's local/gateway/mask/dns accordingly to 192.168.128.x or obtain automatically if you got DHCP upstream. (It'll also pass through the router to clients.)
If you want the WLAN a different network than your LAN, it should be as simple as just giving the router's WAN's local/gateway/mask/dns accordingly to 192.168.128.x (or auto), it's WLAN to whatever you want to use for the new network, and DHCP enabled if you want to use it for the WLAN. Doing something similiar here, using ZoneCD (portal). My LAN is 192.168.x.y, while WLAN is 10.10.x.y. They can all talk just fine to one another.
Only familiar with DLink, but my DLink stuff (routers and AP's) have an option to enable/disable wireless and wired integration. By default, they were all disabled. It wasn't until enabling them that everything could talk to one another.
When you use a wireless router as an AP and plug into one of the LAN ports ... can you still get to that AP config page with a browser to do the setup things? If you have five identical wireless routers and you use 4 of them as APs can each be reached via a browser for setup. (same question 2 times) Is this a viable method of stretching wireless coverage as long as running cables is not an issue? If so... is it best to daisy chain the connections or use the maximum LAN ports from the original wireless router to feed the APs LAN ports? And I'm assuming that however they are physically connected they all get the same SSID but mix up the channels using 1-6-11-1- 6 etc keeping like channels physically separated as best as possible. Correct?
What do you mean by "no network"? No internet? No WinDoze file and print sharing? Is this the one you are happy with?
You are playing around with static IPs on a network you don't administer, and could potentially cause every other machine on the existing network a major problem. You really need to co-ordinate with the network administrators of the LAN you are plugging into. Ask them for a static IP, netmask, default gateway, and DNS server numbers to plug into each of your routers.
Connect the 'internet' port on the routers to the LAN, set the IP, netmask, gateway, and DNS numbers you were given on the WAN (or internet) side, set the LAN side to use a network that's _different_ from your existing LAN, and you should be OK.
Note that the 'play with my files' thing may not work like you think. What files are you talking about, where are they located, and who do you want to share them with. You may need to open some holes in the filewall(s) on your router(s).
Sigh. Prying information out of people with tech wireless questions is frustrating. I can understand not disclosing locations, static IP's, logins, and passwords but why this anonymity craze is being extended to hardware makes, models, and versions is beyond my limited imagination. It's a bit like the browser cookie "threat", where paranoia rules over any attempt to understand how cookies actually work. Anyway, I've tried being polite, diplomatic, humiliating, humorous, vicious, and irate, without any noticeable effect. I would not expect beginners to have an extensive technical vocabulary. I do expect them to supply enough information to get a decent answer. Perhaps it's time to write an FAQ as this nonsense is getting old.
Anyway, we have a local wireless ISP that uses non-routeable, RFC1918 style IP addresses in the 10.xxx.xxx.xxx range. Managing this mess was declared to be a challenge, so the least organized person involved was drafted into assigning IP addresses and managing the list. That was me until recently. Currently, it's about 40 /24 subnets in about
5 VLAN's. Each user has two IP's, one for the wireless and one for the router. There are also about 15 devices on the network. Keeping the IP's straight is a pain.
The major problems are users that want to assign their own IP's, as in this example. A new IP appears out of nowhere and usually causes problems. I use arpwatch to check for any suprises and conflicts. About a month ago, someone decided to reconfigure their router so that their IP address was the same as the gateway router. Since the MAC address was new, I just blocked it by MAC address at the gateway and waited for the phone to ring. 10 minutes later, the complaint arrived and I got to practice primal scream therapy at the bozo. It was a computer professional with many years of experience that should have known better.
On systems that I maintain, NOBODY assigns IP addresses without first asking me or at least telling me shortly afterwards. That included the boss at one company that I locked out until his appointment schedule allowed me to explain the problem. He was angry. I was angrier.
If someone were to assign their own IP address on one of my systems, they will be presumed to be an attacker and treated accordingly.
True, but Mia (the OP) is playing around on a network segment where: /* I have a network with 30 machines with static IPs - 192.168.128.1 through 192.168.128.255.
[Yeah, fuzzy thinking, but you get the idea. Least, I think we do, Jeff would disagree, but I'm not sure how to get Newless Cluebies to give us any more detail than they do. I tend to state my assumptions given the limited information given and present an answer based on my assumptions.]
But it's not clear what the ISP is in this case, and if they really are static IPs, then someone is administering them, and Mia needs to talk to the administrator before assigning one (or worse, two fifty six 8*}) to the WiFi router she(?)'s playing with.
The problem, IMNSHO, is that Mia has just enough knowledge to be dangerous, and may wipe out the existing network by plugging things in and configuring them at random.
I agree, but I don't see that berating the newbies is getting you anywhere. Many times people don't know enough to ask the right questions, much less give us the information we need to answer them. Dunno what the answer is.
Yeah, but the newbies don't (usually) even know what a FAQ is, much less where to find it. Sigh.
Agreed, but I had to try it just to be sure. The important thing is that I answer the questions, not my lack of style and tact. The best I can hope for is the next question will contain sufficient information. I haunt other newsgroups and mailing lists and they all have the same problem. One list demands that the make and model of the automobile in question be supplied or the moderator will delete and bounce the question. The others have similar problems. When the traffic gets high, questions without sufficient information simply get ignored. Perhaps I should do the same.
So, I tell them they're screwing up. Almost everyone understands the problem when I mention it and continue from there. A few get irate and send me some hate mail. The ones that amaze me are those that fail to understand the need for this information and supply even less info in the reply. It's as if I'm responsible for precipitating an interrogation on their behalf. You might be correct that they don't what info is needed, but failing to supply it when asked makes me wonder.
Foreign users, with limited English abilities are sometime difficult to detect and need to be accomidated. It's also difficult to determine a persons level or experience. I often guess wrong on this.
Neither do I. I'll just keep experimenting. So far, diplomacy and hostility seem to be equally ineffective.
Nobody reads the FAQ first. Few seem to know how to use Google. I'm just tired of reposting the same stuff over and over and over. I just want something to point to when I'm busy or lazy. If I'm smart, I'll point to other sites for the basics, and add some articles of mine on common questions. Thinking....
Path loss calculations.
Maximum data rates.
Typical distance versus speed tradeoff.
802.11b versus 802.11g compatibility.
Range extenders, repeaters, and WDS.
Client adapters that handle more than one MAC address.
Security methods and effectiveness.
Long range techniques.
Interference detection and mitigation.
How to troubleshoot connectivity problems.
WEP ASCII to Hex problems.
How to measure or benchmark performance.
Cordless 2.4Ghz phones versus Wi-Fi.
WPA for older devices and PDA's.
Comparison of various antenna types.
FCC 15.247 and 15.204 explained.
Do it thyself antennas and packaging.
Wireless Zero Config versus the manufacturers drivers.
Why (I think) mesh networks suck.
Most of these have been covered in the past and the FAQ can be plagerized from past postings. I'll start with the stuff I care about (RF issues) and just steal the rest. As always, the opinions expressed will be those of the author and do not necessarily represent reality.
Do you guys know why out of my two laserjet printers the color one ALWAYS makes itself DEFAULT printer even though I make the back & white one the default one about 10 times a day? We print checks on the B&W, and it is EXTREMELY frustrating to see a stack of checks printed on blank paper instead of check paper.
How can you make a printer a default and have it stay default?
Why not? Are you somehow afraid that nobody is going to answer your question and prefer to trample on some other topic instead? Topic drift is a common problem and is most commonly an accidental problem. However, doing so intentionally is rather rude.
Yes, I know that answer and I'm really tempted to confirm my reputation as a totally arrogant and obnoxious self centered ego maniac by not answering your question. It's especially true because you apparently did not read my previous message where I complained about people not bothering to describe their problem or what they have to work with. In this case, you didn't bother supplying the model numbers of your printers, your operating system, or your check printing application and version. It's like asking for help with your vehicle engine, without offering a clue as to the make, year and model.
However, I can tell that you are not going to get an answer without much frustration and just hate to see someone suffer.
My guess(tm) is that you're using Quicken, Quickbooks, or Peachtree. These programs do NOT use the Windoze default printer for anything. You must define the default printer used for checks (and the type of paper or forms) in the printer configuration page. You might also find some more specific help in: alt.comp.software.financial.quickbooks alt.comp.software.financial.quicken alt.comp.software.financial.peachtree
That was about as clear as mud. I meant the printer configuration page in Quicken, Quickbooks, or Peachtree. Each program has a place where you decide which printer gets the forms, the reports, the checks, and perhaps the envelopes.