LAN to LAN + UTP cable?

I want to connect a Linksys router to an SMC router (primary; connected
to a cablemodem), LAN to LAN. Is it possible to connect the second
router (Linksys) with a terminal, using an UTP cable? (The terminal
needs an Internet connection.)

 

Used to be routers had a port marked "Uplink". When using the uplink
port, some routers usurp one of the other LAN ports (i.e., when using
the uplink port, one of the LAN ports becomes unusable). Nowadays some
routers let you use any LAN-side port to uplink to another router; that
is, you won't find a LAN-side port marked "uplink".

http://www.jssweb.net/images/linksys.jpg

You'd have a setup like (except replace the WAP with the cable modem):

http://flylib.com/books/2/317/1/html/2/images/0912.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lx3kENudN9g/TdJrTAGC1ZI/AAAAAAAACUI/Z40cUCeIZ74/s1600/lan%27s.gif

Whether each router (via its switch) created its own subnet or was
transparent (so your whole intranet was one subnet) depended on how you
configured each sub-router in the tree. You'd have CAT5 for each device
going to the router, even between the routers to uplink one to another.
Since you mentioned "wire" then you're not asking about how to chain
together wireless routers.

"Linksys router" and "SMC router" don't tell anyone which models you
have to know how to configure them for router chaining. Until those
details are known, only you know the capabilities of your routers since
only you know what their manuals say (which is what we would be doing in
your place, anyway). Read the SMC router's manual to see if a port is
dedicated for uplinking from another (Linksys) router or if any of its
LAN-side ports can be used for uplinking.

 

I was hoping for a "yes" or "no" answer. ;-)

AFAIK there is no uplinking. As for the routers:

SMC
SMCWBR14-G2 (192.168.2.1)

<http://www.smc.com/en-global/products/product/95/0>

Cisco/Linksys
E2000 met DD-WRT firmware (192.168.1.1)

<http://www.linksys.com/en-apac/products/routers/e2000>

<http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Linksys_E2000>

If it's too much trouble I'm simply going for the LAN to WAN solution...

 

If you just need more Ethernet ports, use a switch.

If you don't have a switch, but you do have a router, then yes you can
connect them in such a way that you're only using the switch in the second
device.

Log into the second router and disable DHCP. Optionally, use this
opportunity to configure a static LAN IP in the second router, making sure
it's an address outside of the DHCP scope of the first router. Finally,
connect the two devices LAN to LAN. Leave the second unit's WAN port unused.

 

Those are wireless routers with wired ports. For some wireless routers,
you can use bridging; however, I didn't see any mention of it in the
online Linksys manual (and SMC doesn't provide an online copy of the
manual to see what that router can do). SMC had this FAQ article:

http://www.smc.com/en-global/faq/view/0/30/1/1?search=1&main=18&sub=0&model=0&keyword=bridge

They mention a slightly different model so the SMC model that you have
might not work. You'll have to check if your wireless SMC supports WDS
(Wireless Distribution System). See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_distribution_system

I saw no mention of WDS in the Linksys manual. If you're going to just
hook the routers together using a CAT5 cable, run the WAN port from
sub-router to a LAN port in the other. If you go LAN port to LAN port,
you have to make one router subservient, like disabling its DHCP server
(unless every host on that router is using static IP addressing). See:

http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/ukp.aspx?pid=80&vw=1&articleid=3733

Sorry, I have no experience with substituting the firmware of a router
with the 3rd party versions, like DD-WRT.

 

I'm under the assumption that he/she only needs one or more additional
Ethernet ports, so it's irrelevant that they have wireless capabilities,
unless perhaps it comes with a recommendation to disable the wireless
portion.

Bridges are Layer 2; Switches are Layer 2. Switches are little more than
N-way bridges. Also, NAT routers (wired or wireless) that include a built in
switch can all be used as a switch, simply by disabling certain functions
(DHCP and WiFi, for example), and ignoring certain other features (the
router function, for example).

You shouldn't expect the manufacturer to talk about using their product with
most of its features disabled.

WDS is a wireless protocol, which is completely irrelevant to the current
discussion.

Bad idea, unless he/she wants to create two distinct subnets, with one
reachable from the other but not vice versa. If he/she only needs one or
more additional Ethernet ports, they should be connected LAN port to LAN
port.

I covered that in a previous post.

I have over a decade of experience with dd-wrt, but I don't see it as
relevant to the current discussion. Any NAT router, wired or wireless, can
be used as a switch (or as an access point, for that matter).

 

Then you are unaware of bridging wireless routers despite the article I
mentioned. He could do it with wire. He could do it with wireless.
But not if the routers don't support either.

When haven't NAT routers included a switch? I already mentioned
configuring the router, like disabling DHCP (which is irrelevant,
anyway, if static IP addresses are used for the intranet hosts), to
devolve a router to a switch.

How about a manufacturer talking about the features they *do* include?
Linksys has an online manual. They aren't hiding features so if a
feature isn't mentioned then it isn't there. Just how does a
manufacture hide in their manual a feature when the manual isn't
available? Perhaps you have tons of manuals laying around for various
brands and model of networking gear but I rely on reviewing online
manuals for what I don't own.

Not if the OP wanted to use wireless to bridge the routers. Just
because the OP mentioned wire doesn't mean he knows about bridging.
Maybe that's as much as he knew: somehow wire them together.

Whether you can drill into subnets depends on the security functions, if
even present, to isolate one subnet from another. We're talking about
consumer-grade gear here, not rack-mounted enterprise-level routers.

In fact, subnetting can benefit the network by isolating traffic. If
one subnet is used for network testing then perhaps you don't want all
that traffic on the other subnets. Subnets do not necessarily block
access by the hosts on a subnet from going through the router to the
other subnet and then to the Internet. Many corporate networks are
designed just that way.

The Linksys article was more detailed than your summarization. Sorry,
but I don't recognize your clairvoyence in knowing the expertise of the
OP. What, you're so vain that you cannot stand someone possibly
overlapping your advice? Go get your virtual gun and shoot me then.

None of the 3rd party firmware updates can modify or add to the feature
set of a router? Then what's the point of installing them?

 

I found this article which describes what you say:
<http://kb.linksys.com/Linksys/ukp.aspx?pid=80&vw=1&articleid=3733>

- disable DHCP
- static IP

The SMC router is 192.168.2.1, so I was planning on making the Linksys
router 192.168.2.2 and then access the SMC and change de Start IP
Address 192.168.2.3.

 

I just noticed that VanguardLH found this link as well. I found it very
informative. I also watched some instruction videos on YouTube, but it
wasn't clear to me if I could connect a UTP-cable to the secondary
router. Now I know it's possible.

Wireless is also needed since I want a stronger wireless signal on the
ground floor (and outside). I want to install a WiFi cam inside and
another one outside. The primary router is situated in the attic and the
signal isn't that strong.

 

Perfect! That should do it.

 

Well, I'm aware of wireless bridges, wireless routers, wired routers, etc.
I'm also aware that any Ethernet switch can be used as a bridge, including
every Ethernet switch included as part of a "router". Have I missed anything
so far?

Every router that includes a switch has no choice but to support bridging.
Bridging is essentially a subset of switching.

Since the advent of NAT routers, there have been models that don't include a
switch. My first router was that type, a Linksys BEFSR11, the little brother
to the BEFSR41, which had a 4-port switch. Switchless routers have been
available ever since.

Yeah, so did I, but I wouldn't say that disabling DHCP is optional.

Come on, even you must know that there's just a tiny bit of burden on the
consumer. The manufacturer isn't going to lay it all out for you. Linksys
isn't going to market a wireless router with these bullet points:
-Can be used as a wireless bridge!
-Can be used as an access point!
-Can be used as a DHCP server!
and so on.

No, they would rather sell separate devices, at least for the bridging and
AP functions, even though those devices cost significantly more while doing
significantly less.

Obviously not true. It only means it isn't in the manual. Whether it's in
the product or not is a completely different question.

Dude, you have a helluva reach. Great job making things up to justify
yourself. I'm seriously impressed.

Reminder: the OP asked about connecting a couple of routers to gain one or
more additional Ethernet ports. Sometimes you get so long-winded that you
clearly forget where you started. For what the OP asked about, 3rd party
firmware isn't required. I'm surprised to see that you're surprised by that.

 

Tnx, I'll try the set-up this weekend or the next.

 

On Mon, 27 Oct 2014 21:28:41 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

For a router to be used as a Access Point you have AFAIK to disable the NAT
routing functionality so that the router runs in "pass through" mode.

i.e. all packets not addressed specifically to the router get passed
through unchanged just like a dumb hub (possibly get filtered to not pass
through to any device elsewhere on the network as in a smart switch).

Are you saying that this function is accessible on ALL consumer grade NAT
routers?

If so, are you saying that it is available as an option in the GUI, or are
you saying that this may be a hidden option?

I am specifically interested because of the Buffalo WHR-1166D AirStation
AC1200 which has an unusual configuration of four 10/100 LAN ports and a
Gigabit WAN port.

This is surprisingly cheaper than APs with a Gigabit port, so it would be
good to be able to use it as an AP and ignore all the routing functions.

Cheers

Dave R

 

True, and the easiest way to disable NAT is to simply ignore the WAN port
and leave it unused. If you really need that extra port, you can install 3rd
party firmware (dd-wrt is recommended, if your router supports it) and
assign the WAN port to the LAN.

An unmanaged switch always acts like a switch, never like a hub. The switch
built into a consumer grade NAT router is always an unmanaged switch.

Yes, with some basic configuration steps. Here's a starting point:

I've never seen it in a GUI, that I know of. That would make it hard for a
manufacturer to sell a (higher priced) access point as a separate unit. At
the same time, I don't consider it a hidden option. It's just taking a
device that can do multiple things and using it for a subset of those
things.

As an access point, the single Gig port obviously won't be of much use, but
with 3rd party firmware (if applicable) you can at least assign it to the
LAN and not lose it completely.

 

Well, O.K. - all I can find via Google is methods for using the LAN ports,
and ignoring the WAN port.

Specifically for the Buffalo WHR-1166D AirStation AC1200:

As an Access Point the Gigabit port is key, because you can then use the
wireless side at speeds above 100 Mbits/sec (allegedly) linked into a
Gigabit LAN. I do have doubts about achieving speeds over 100 Meg but I
also have doubts about getting anywhere near 100 Meg with lower rated
wireless protocols.

[Note that I currently have 150 mbits/sec cable, and several Gigabit PCs
on a Gigabit switch and router, so Gigabit speeds to the AP are very
useful.]

Effectively you are buying a single port Gigabit wireless AP (oh, and for
some reason someone tacked a 4 port 100 Meg hub on the side).

So the only solution which would work for me is converting the Gigabit
port into a LAN port so I can have a wired Gigabit LAN connection on my
wireless AP.

The Buffalo WHR-1166D AirStation AC1200 does not currently seem to be
listed in the main DD-WRT router database.

It isn't listed in "Supported Devices" either although the 1166DHP is
(which is reported to have 4 Gigabit LAN ports and one Gigabit WAN port).

It is listed in
<https://wikidevi.com/wiki/List_of_802.11ac_Hardware>
with a Mediatec MT7620A and a Mediatec M7621E but incorrectly listed as
having 4 * 10/100 LAN and 10/100 WAN.


I did read somewhere that one of the the Mediatec chips provided 4 *
10/100 LAN ports. Ah
<https://wikidevi.com/wiki/MediaTek_MT7620>

"integrated 6-port Ethernet switch (MT7530) with five 10/100 PHYs"

Still trying to track down the WAN port - may be associated with the
MT7612E but information on this chip is less available than for the M7620A.

Anyway, I think the conclusion is that the only way to use the WAN port
when converting a SOHO router to an AP is to load on third party software
such as DD-WRT.

Unfortunately this doesn't seem to be currently available for the router I
am investigating.

As you say, this is just the manufacturers screwing us all over to pay
more for an AP than a router (and getting less functionality).

Cheers

Dave R

 

Le 27/10/2014 20:27, s|b a écrit :

Yes, that's what I've done for my home network because the router-modem
hired by my ISP wasn't compatible (no ipv6) in wan2lan with my Linksys
router.
You have to change some settings in the secondary router, like assigning
an ip on the same network (for example if your primary router is on
192.168.0.1, just set the Linksys ip to 192.168.0.2) and turn off the
DHCP on the Linksys (it will find the information on the primary
router). The turn everything off and on again in order:
modem-router, 2nd router, terminal(s).

--
« Tous les temps sont des temps de détresse, il y a quelquefois des
poètes. » André du Bouchet

http://jamen.do/l/a131552
http://bluedusk.blogspot.fr/
http://soundcloud.com/rvgronoff
http://www.toutelapoesie.com/salons/user/18908-guillaume-daquile/

 

Thanks for confirming this set-up will work. I've set up the second
router (Linksys), but I haven't connected it yet. I need another
UTP-cable to connect the terminal too and I've been trying to get this
crappy Wanscam JW0004 IP cam too work. Wireless and mail are simply
impossible to get working and I've been waiting 3 days for their
(crappy) support to react.

(Should have told my uncle to *not* buy Chinese hardware...)