recommandations for a 2nd wifi "switch"

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.fr hath wroth:

In general, what you want is called a "workgroup bridge". Cisco and

Cisco |

Workgroup bridge.

Yes, but it would only be used to administer and managed the device. Bridges are Layer 2 devices (MAC layer) and don't know anything about IP addresess.

No. However, there is a potential compatibility issue. The ability to simulate multiple connections from a single wireless link may be a problem. If possible, try before you buy.

No.

I would not run your network that way you have it setup. You have what is called "double NAT" where there are two routers, each of which supplies NAT IP addresses to the LAN side. I suggest you consider reconfiguring the DI-624 into an access point. That will allow all your clients to run on one class C subnet (192.168.2.xxx). In addition, you could change your netmask to 255.255.255.0. To setup as an access point.

1. Change the DI-624 IP address to 192.168.2.something that does not conflict with already used IP addresses.
2. Disable the DHCP server.
3. Do not plug anything into the WAN port.
4. Connect the CAT5 cable from the unspecified main router LAN port to one of the LAN ports on the DI-624. You may need a cross over ethernet cable.

Jeff Liebermann hath wroth:

Sorry. I forgot you wanted cheap. Linksys WET11 or WET54G will also act as a "workgroup bridge", although they don't call it that. However, be careful with devices claiming to be a "bridge". Many of them will only bridge exactly one MAC addresses. That won't work with more than one machine behind the wireless bridge. Unfortunately, the manufactories do not disclose how many MAC addresses they will bridge. Some "game adapters" might work, but again there's no indication of how many MAC addresses they'll pass.

Hi,

thanks a lot for your explanations, I'll carefully read that and do some more research (and ask more questions :)

I see what you mean about moving everything to a class C subnet.

But you said I should connect the CAT5 cable from the main router LAN port to one of the LAN port on the DI-624.

However, there's already such a connection established: the non-wifi router has four RJ45 port (so does the DLink DI-624) and there's an CAT5 cable going from one to the other.

By checking the cables (one minute ago), I realized that the setup was even a little bit more "complicated" than that.

I've got:

telephone line | | Alcatel "Speedtouch" ADSL "modem" establishing the ADSL sync | | Sweex router (piece of 25 Euros crap, but it does the job ;) | (so that Sweex router just does the "PPPoE" thinggy) | | from one of the four RJ45 port of the Sweex "router" | to one of the four RJ45 port of the DI-624+ | | DI-DLink 624+

I probably could just throw the Alcatel Speedtouch and the Sweex away and hook a plain-old switch to the Dlink (I've got some spare parts lying around).

Thanks again, I'll go re-reading all you wrote a few times :)

Driss

Well, preferably cheap... If something cheap does the job I'd rather go for it :)

I see my local computer parts dealer proposes the WET54G.

I didn't understand everything, so I've got more questions :)

A "real" workgroup bridge can bridge more than one MAC address?

Does the WET-54G act as real "workgroup bridge" (ie it will bridge more than one MAC address)?

If I want to "bridge" two wifi switches, only one of them need to be able to act as a workgroup bridge?

Thanks a lot for your informations once again,

Driss

replying to myself...

I did a temporary kludge using spare parts lying around to workaround my problem: I realized I could add a wifi card in one Linux PC in (and used ndiswrapper around Windows drivers) the new office room (1st floor) in addition to the regular ethernet card in that PC.

Then I put a switch in that 2nd office room, then configured the Linux PC to do SNAT for the other PCs in that room (so they can access the internet).

I still could do DNAT for the network printer (so the PCs wanting to print from the 2nd floor on the first floor printer can reach the printer, but it's not mandatory as there's already an network printer on the 2nd floor). No hack is needed for the PCs in the same room as they're on the same switch as the printer.

Of course this means that the Linux PC has to be turned on when someone's in the room (but it's not a big problem).

I'll just use it that way until I get a "real" wifi workgroup bridge set up.

Just something I found... At the Local Wal-Mart they have WRT54G's for $43.95.. I picked up a few of them (turn off the DH server and wap part), and then daisy chain output from one to the WAP input of the next.... Get three outputs from each (minus one of the 4 for daiy chaining), and can access stuff on the network both wired and wirelessly, and when I got a wild hair up my ... I just turned on the wap part of one, and gave it a unique ssid (could have been the same SSID and same channel, but I wanted a public wireless (open for guests) and a private with WPA wireless).... Not sure why you couldn't just do the same thing (maybe you could), after all The WRT is a Wap and Router in one box, and the price was certainly right.

Course there is one important piece of info.... The directions say to NEVER do that (output of one to the WAN input of the next)... This is one of those times to ignore the directions (similar to jeffs learn by destroying.. I learn by doing what I'm told not to:).

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.fr hath wroth:

No problem. Cheap works well for non-critical applications.

Yes.

Yes.

No. A workgroup bridge is effectively a fancy client radio. It really can't handle too many MAC addresses. Most of the bottom of the line bridges will to no more then 32 MAC addresses. I'm fairly sure the WET11 his 32 MAC's max. No clue on the WET54G.

For point to point bridging between two networks, you want a "wireless bridge" or "transparent bridge", which by definition will pass more than one MAC address. Basically, you need as many MAC addresses passed as you have devices on both ends of the bridge.

See: |

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.fr hath wroth:

Note that you have 2 routers in series for double NAT. My guess is you have something like this:

Alcatel "Speedtouch" ADSL "modem" establishing the ADSL sync | | [routeable IP address] | WAN Sweex ROUTER 192.168.2.1 | | WAN 192.168.2.2 DLink DI-624+ ROUTER 192.168.0.1 | 192.168.0.2-254

I can't figure out where you placed the switches. What I'm suggesting is that you disarm the 2nd DI-624 and use it as an access point. The result will be:

Alcatel "Speedtouch" ADSL "modem" establishing the ADSL sync | | [routeable IP address] | WAN Sweex ROUTER LAN 192.168.2.1 | | LAN 192.168.2.2 DLink DI-624+ As Access point | 192.168.2.3-254

Yep, that's another way to do it.