Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Plugging a Wireless AP into a Wired Router?

Tags:
  • Wireless
  • Routers
  • Wireless Networking
Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 1:16:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Hi Everyone,

I've got a Linksys non-wireless router with a few PCs plugged into it
sharing an ADSL connection. The router handles NAT, all that good
stuff.

I'd like to plug some cat 5 Ethernet cable into the router and connect
a wireless access point to the other end of the cable, about 75 meters
away, to provide wireless coverage to a 3-4 laptops.

Is this as simple as it sounds? Or is there something I'm overlooking?
Presumably the second access point will also use NAT, so we'll wind up
with routable IP <=> NAT <=> NAT... Is that going to be a problem? Is
there a specific product I could connect to the end of the cable that
would address these issues?

Thanks in advance.

Geoff Glave
Vancouver, Canada

More about : plugging wireless wired router

Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 3:15:19 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

> Connect the cable from the wired router (one of the four LAN ports) to one
> of the four LAN ports on the wireless router - not the WAN port.

I presume I need to use a crossover cable to do that?

Cheers,
Geoff Glave
Vancouver, Canada
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 3:16:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

>the *second* access point ?? thought there was only one.

Yes - Shouldn't post to usenet before I've had coffee... ONE AP, ONE
wired router.

>The AP should turn off its DHCP server when it sees the DHCP server in
the router allocate it an IP address, it will then be transparent to
the wireless client PCs acting as a wired - wireless bridge.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Geoff Glave
Vancouver, Canada
Related resources
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 4:49:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Connect the cable from the wired router (one of the four LAN ports) to one
of the four LAN ports on the wireless router - not the WAN port.

<gglave@softtracks.com> wrote in message
news:1123863408.313301.134710@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Hi Everyone,

I've got a Linksys non-wireless router with a few PCs plugged into it
sharing an ADSL connection. The router handles NAT, all that good
stuff.

I'd like to plug some cat 5 Ethernet cable into the router and connect
a wireless access point to the other end of the cable, about 75 meters
away, to provide wireless coverage to a 3-4 laptops.

Is this as simple as it sounds? Or is there something I'm overlooking?
Presumably the second access point will also use NAT, so we'll wind up
with routable IP <=> NAT <=> NAT... Is that going to be a problem? Is
there a specific product I could connect to the end of the cable that
would address these issues?

Thanks in advance.

Geoff Glave
Vancouver, Canada
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 6:45:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

> >Connect the cable from the wired router (one of the four LAN ports) to one
> >of the four LAN ports on the wireless router - not the WAN port.
>
> there is no wireless router, its an access point.

Makes sense - By plugging into one of the LAN ports the wireless
router/AP simply becomes and AP, as would happen when I plugged two
hubs together using the LAN ports.

The only thing that confuses me is when I plug two hubs togther I have
to use a cross-over cable (unless one of them happens to have an
"uplink" port or similar). Why don't I have to use a crossover cable
in this example?

Cheers,
Geoff Glave
Vancouver, Canada
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 9:34:40 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 12 Aug 2005 09:16:48 -0700, gglave@softtracks.com wrote:

>I'd like to plug some cat 5 Ethernet cable into the router and connect
>a wireless access point to the other end of the cable, about 75 meters
>away, to provide wireless coverage to a 3-4 laptops.
>
>Is this as simple as it sounds? Or is there something I'm overlooking?
> Presumably the second access point will also use NAT,

the *second* access point ?? thought there was only one.

The AP should turn off its DHCP server when it sees the DHCP server in
the router allocate it an IP address, it will then be transparent to
the wireless client PCs acting as a wired - wireless bridge.

double-natting would occur with a wireless router but not an AP.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 11:29:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 12:49:39 -0400, "CF" <careyfisher@ncsradio.com>
wrote:

>Connect the cable from the wired router (one of the four LAN ports) to one
>of the four LAN ports on the wireless router - not the WAN port.

there is no wireless router, its an access point.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 12, 2005 11:38:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 12 Aug 2005 11:15:19 -0700, gglave@softtracks.com wrote:

>
>I presume I need to use a crossover cable to do that?

its the wrong thing to do, your Access Point will expect to connect to
a LAN port with a standard patch cable.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 13, 2005 3:44:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On 12 Aug 2005 14:45:42 -0700, gglave@softtracks.com wrote:

>The only thing that confuses me is when I plug two hubs togther I have
>to use a cross-over cable (unless one of them happens to have an
>"uplink" port or similar). Why don't I have to use a crossover cable
>in this example?

if its an Access Point, as originally stated, it has one port that is
in effect an uplink port and it expects to be patched into another LAN
port with a straight through cable.

Its wired the same as a PC NIC, its built to plug in direct.

If its a router and you're using a LAN port then a crossover cable
could be required if there isn't an uplink port, a switch or if the
device doesn't support auto-sensing as some do.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 13, 2005 1:18:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

My 2 cents worth..........
I just set up EXACTLY what you want to do yesterday.
The person I did it for rushed out & got ADSL connected to their business
without any planning involved.
They had it installed to the office on the ground floor with only a 4 port
ADSL modem (no wireless).
They asked me about getting the other 3 ports to work upstairs in their
living quarters. (teenage kids!)
I bought a Motorola WA840G wireless access point & a 30 meter length of
cable.
There was no easy way to run the cable upstairs in this old building that
has over a foot thick walls of stone so I positioned the wireless access
point in the room under the living quarters which were up the other end of
the building to the adsl modem.
With this Motorola unit comes a "short" crossover cable to hook directly
from comp to AP for set up purposes only. (entering MAC addressess & setting
up you choice of security etc)
Once setup you can then replace that cable or use it for connecting to the
adsl modem or any other hub, switch etc you feel like.
NOW to get to your main question..........
On this unit it DOES NOT MATTER if it is cross over or straight through.
In fact most modern gear will auto detect type of cable now days.
One "problem" I encountered was getting back into the setup if need be
because the proper 192.168.40.1 doesn't work once the adsl has issued the
new IP.
You need to insert the disk & proceed until it says "changing network setup
details" & then open your browser to login.
Just a thought??????????
Might you one day need to connect to this AP by cable? Think about it? Won't
cost much more to get a 4 port / wireless AP??
Regards.............



"Phil Thompson" <phil.thompson@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:vd9qf118vg1u05chsra6f5m38dr5gatfuc@4ax.com...
> On 12 Aug 2005 14:45:42 -0700, gglave@softtracks.com wrote:
>
>>The only thing that confuses me is when I plug two hubs togther I have
>>to use a cross-over cable (unless one of them happens to have an
>>"uplink" port or similar). Why don't I have to use a crossover cable
>>in this example?
>
> if its an Access Point, as originally stated, it has one port that is
> in effect an uplink port and it expects to be patched into another LAN
> port with a straight through cable.
>
> Its wired the same as a PC NIC, its built to plug in direct.
>
> If its a router and you're using a LAN port then a crossover cable
> could be required if there isn't an uplink port, a switch or if the
> device doesn't support auto-sensing as some do.
>
> Phil
> --
> Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
Anonymous
a b F Wireless
August 13, 2005 1:18:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 09:18:54 +0930, "BruceM" <bruce@@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>Might you one day need to connect to this AP by cable? Think about it? Won't
>cost much more to get a 4 port / wireless AP??

most APs are plugged into hubs or switches so there's plenty of
opportunity to chat to the AP from a PC on the same LAN via another
port of the hub/switch.

Phil
--
Remember - Global Warming is only a weather forecast :-)
!