Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

help with setting up 2 APs

Last response: in Wireless Networking
Share
April 11, 2004 11:04:09 PM

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

I'm in a bit over my head with this. The equipment is as follows:
Belkin wireless router, Cisco 340 wireless bridge, Netgear RT314 4
port wired router. I would like to hook up a network-ready printer
upstairs while leaving the cable modem downstairs. I thought I could
put the Belkin router downstairs, connected to the cable modem, put
the 340 and Netgear upstairs and connect the printer. The problem is
how to configure the 340 and Belkin so that one handles Internet
traffic and the other is basically a bridge and only handles print
jobs. The 340 can be set to AP mode or bridge only mode. The Belkin
can be set to AP only mode. I tried to set the 340 to bridge only, but
that didn't work. The 340 and Belkin do not see each other. They're
set to the same SSID, different channels, same subnet. I've tried DHCP
and manually setting static IP; should I set them to different
subnets? What else can I try? Thanks.

Andy

More about : setting aps

Anonymous
April 12, 2004 6:39:30 PM

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

I am assuming you have signal upstairs when you connect wireless router
downstairs.
If this is your case, get rid of the extra wired router and bridge upstairs.
Replace this combo with a 350 workgroup bridge to save $$$. You can connect
a small hub to the WGB and connect your printer to this hub using a network
cable.

HTH

"Andy" <hsiacc@mail.com> wrote in message
news:D 3176d67.0404111804.7bc84a86@posting.google.com...
> I'm in a bit over my head with this. The equipment is as follows:
> Belkin wireless router, Cisco 340 wireless bridge, Netgear RT314 4
> port wired router. I would like to hook up a network-ready printer
> upstairs while leaving the cable modem downstairs. I thought I could
> put the Belkin router downstairs, connected to the cable modem, put
> the 340 and Netgear upstairs and connect the printer. The problem is
> how to configure the 340 and Belkin so that one handles Internet
> traffic and the other is basically a bridge and only handles print
> jobs. The 340 can be set to AP mode or bridge only mode. The Belkin
> can be set to AP only mode. I tried to set the 340 to bridge only, but
> that didn't work. The 340 and Belkin do not see each other. They're
> set to the same SSID, different channels, same subnet. I've tried DHCP
> and manually setting static IP; should I set them to different
> subnets? What else can I try? Thanks.
>
> Andy
April 12, 2004 6:39:31 PM

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

"KAL SANNEDHI" <don'tspamme@spambuster.com> wrote in message news:<c5dmub$feeh$1@ID-225230.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> I am assuming you have signal upstairs when you connect wireless router
> downstairs.
> If this is your case, get rid of the extra wired router and bridge upstairs.
> Replace this combo with a 350 workgroup bridge to save $$$. You can connect
> a small hub to the WGB and connect your printer to this hub using a network
> cable.
>
> HTH

Even if I replaced the 340/wired router combo with the 350, how would
the 350 be set up? My problem seems to be between the 2 wireless APs
not talking to each other. The 340 can be set up as bridge only, would
that be functionally equivalent to what you're suggesting with the
350? Right now it's set to access point. Whenever I set it as bridge
only I can't connect to it to configure it. How about the root mode,
do I set it to root on or off? I think the equipment I've got will do
the trick, I just have to find the correct configuration. I wish I
knew more about networking!
Related resources
April 14, 2004 12:51:47 PM

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

Actually I have not read about this AP, however some AP's in "Bridge Mode"
will only talk to other AP's that are in the same mode. What you should
look into is a WDS repeater units, it is a good solution for what you are
looking to do. Disadvantage is a little hit on performance on a heavily
used network, but for smaller networks it is great! So long as one can see
the other they share clients. If your units does have this mode, you should
perhaps think of just running them as AP's on different channels and SSID's
and run cable between them. Just a thought.

Michael

"Andy" <hsiacc@mail.com> wrote in message
news:D 3176d67.0404120803.54245cad@posting.google.com...
> "KAL SANNEDHI" <don'tspamme@spambuster.com> wrote in message
news:<c5dmub$feeh$1@ID-225230.news.uni-berlin.de>...
> > I am assuming you have signal upstairs when you connect wireless router
> > downstairs.
> > If this is your case, get rid of the extra wired router and bridge
upstairs.
> > Replace this combo with a 350 workgroup bridge to save $$$. You can
connect
> > a small hub to the WGB and connect your printer to this hub using a
network
> > cable.
> >
> > HTH
>
> Even if I replaced the 340/wired router combo with the 350, how would
> the 350 be set up? My problem seems to be between the 2 wireless APs
> not talking to each other. The 340 can be set up as bridge only, would
> that be functionally equivalent to what you're suggesting with the
> 350? Right now it's set to access point. Whenever I set it as bridge
> only I can't connect to it to configure it. How about the root mode,
> do I set it to root on or off? I think the equipment I've got will do
> the trick, I just have to find the correct configuration. I wish I
> knew more about networking!
April 14, 2004 8:56:10 PM

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

Okay I've made some progress. The 340 in "bridge only" mode now exists
peacefully with the Belkin wireless router. All 3 of my wireless
clients can accesses the Internet, but still none can see the Aironet
or the printer. I understand in bridge only mode the WAP is not
supposed to accept clients, but isn't it supposed to bridge me between
the Belkin to the printer? They are set to the same SSID but on
different subnets. The Belkin is 192.168.2.x and the Aironet is on
192.168.0.x; and both subnet mask is 255.255.255.0. So why isn't the
bridge bridging me between 2 LAN's?

"Michael" <teknowene@excite.com> wrote in message news:<DY6fc.113580$Ig.75446@pd7tw2no>...
> Actually I have not read about this AP, however some AP's in "Bridge Mode"
> will only talk to other AP's that are in the same mode. What you should
> look into is a WDS repeater units, it is a good solution for what you are
> looking to do. Disadvantage is a little hit on performance on a heavily
> used network, but for smaller networks it is great! So long as one can see
> the other they share clients. If your units does have this mode, you should
> perhaps think of just running them as AP's on different channels and SSID's
> and run cable between them. Just a thought.
>
> Michael
April 15, 2004 9:58:22 AM

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

They should be on the same subnet. It is a bridge not a router.

Michael
"Andy" <hsiacc@mail.com> wrote in message
news:D 3176d67.0404141556.183d6da@posting.google.com...
> Okay I've made some progress. The 340 in "bridge only" mode now exists
> peacefully with the Belkin wireless router. All 3 of my wireless
> clients can accesses the Internet, but still none can see the Aironet
> or the printer. I understand in bridge only mode the WAP is not
> supposed to accept clients, but isn't it supposed to bridge me between
> the Belkin to the printer? They are set to the same SSID but on
> different subnets. The Belkin is 192.168.2.x and the Aironet is on
> 192.168.0.x; and both subnet mask is 255.255.255.0. So why isn't the
> bridge bridging me between 2 LAN's?
>
> "Michael" <teknowene@excite.com> wrote in message
news:<DY6fc.113580$Ig.75446@pd7tw2no>...
> > Actually I have not read about this AP, however some AP's in "Bridge
Mode"
> > will only talk to other AP's that are in the same mode. What you should
> > look into is a WDS repeater units, it is a good solution for what you
are
> > looking to do. Disadvantage is a little hit on performance on a heavily
> > used network, but for smaller networks it is great! So long as one can
see
> > the other they share clients. If your units does have this mode, you
should
> > perhaps think of just running them as AP's on different channels and
SSID's
> > and run cable between them. Just a thought.
> >
> > Michael
April 16, 2004 1:06:54 PM

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

Maybe that's my problem. So you're saying the bridge will only connect
to another AP on the same subnet?? I thought the wireless bridge will
bridge between 2 subnets. It's hooked up to an Ethernet router. Maybe
I need to replace the Ethernet router with a switch, that way it'll
all be on 1 subnet with the Belkin taking care of DHCP. Man I wish I
knew more about networking. Any good tutorials out there?

"Michael" <teknowene@excite.com> wrote in message news:<2wpfc.117657$Pk3.41490@pd7tw1no>...
> They should be on the same subnet. It is a bridge not a router.
>
> Michael
Anonymous
April 16, 2004 8:14:34 PM

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

hsiacc@mail.com (Andy) wrote in news:D 3176d67.0404160806.48a04192
@posting.google.com:

> So you're saying the bridge will only connect
> to another AP on the same subnet??

Sounds like it. The Wireless Bridge is probably acting as a transparent
bridge, bridging packets from wired interface to wireless. You'll need to
stick a router in there somewhere to route the packets correctly between
the subnets.

--
Lucas Tam (REMOVEnntp@rogers.com)
Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying.
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/
April 16, 2004 11:04:25 PM

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

After some more research, and I think someone has suggested, there
seems to be several Ethernet to wireless bridges sold by the major
brands (like D-Link DWL810+, Linksys WET11, Netgear ME101NA) which
will do the trick. Then I remember what I have _is_ a wireless bridge,
says so right on the unit. I disconnected the Ethernet router and
connected the printer directly to the Aironet 340, but I had to use a
crossover cable. It still not working!? This is Aironet, it's supposed
to be professional strength instead of consumer. Is it just too old or
are wireless bridges not created equal?

There is nothing special to a crossover cable, is there? I mean, the
units sold by DLink, Linksys, Netgear probably just have internal
crossover instead of having to use a crossover cable, right? Man I'm
confused and I don't want to spend $100 for a bridge.

Lucas Tam <REMOVEnntp@rogers.com> wrote in message news:<Xns94CD7C962FCE8nntprogerscom@140.99.99.130>...
> hsiacc@mail.com (Andy) wrote in news:D 3176d67.0404160806.48a04192
> @posting.google.com:
>
> > So you're saying the bridge will only connect
> > to another AP on the same subnet??
>
> Sounds like it. The Wireless Bridge is probably acting as a transparent
> bridge, bridging packets from wired interface to wireless. You'll need to
> stick a router in there somewhere to route the packets correctly between
> the subnets.
April 16, 2004 11:26:05 PM

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

Hmmm, using different search terms, I came up with this thread from 3
years ago: http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=U...;


I will give it a try, but the guy was asking the exact question and
got it to work. The whole time I was just missing the "root off"
switch, which I never would have thought to change because I thought
the "root" option controls whether or not the Ethernet port is active
(though there is another menu which controls that). Whatever...what
does root mean again? Too many options to configure.
!