|
I have a WRT400n running DDWRT (v24-sp2). The router has two antennas, one for the 2.4ghz band, and the other one for the 5ghz band. For a variety of reasons, I can't plug our cable modem directly to this router (or, more accurately, I could but due to its positioning the back half of the apartment wouldn't get any signal). I do, however, have a spare wrt54gs, and line of sight to the back end of the room the modem is in, which is enough distance that devices on the other side of the apartment can get a couple of bars. Is there any way to set up the router so that it will join a wireless G network only for the purposes of acquiring an internet connection? What I want to do is basically use the G-band as a sort of "wireless direct connection" between the modem and the wrt400n, but I want to avoid using the 54gs as the main router because then every N device would basically be throttled down to wireless G speeds. Sorry if this doesn't make any sense, late Sunday night was probably not the best time to write it. Just to get it out of the way, setting up ethernet cables is not an option, as much as I wish I could.
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2012 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
Is there any particular powerline networking kit you guys recommend? These seem to have the best reviews, but I figured I'd ask around first. My apartment is old as heck so I doubt it's gonna have te best wiring, so if buying slightly more expensive will help me mitigate that, I'm willing to shell out a bit more.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2012 23:19
|
|
|
Are MoCA 1.1 products being phased out because a new batch of products (with MoCA 2.0) is about to hit or something? It seems that everywhere I look, most options are out of stock (or twice as expensive as they were last year).
|
|
#
¿
May 2, 2013 21:48
|
|
|
Hopefully. Right now, I'm still running 10/100 because I simply can't throw cat6e through my walls, and powerline equipment just isnt' reliable enough. Further gooling seems to imply there just isn't enough demand out there right now so manufactures just aren't shoving out new products. Slightly related question: Is there any way to share a coax output plug (the one that comes out of the wall, basically) between both an HD receiver and a cable-modem without suffering (significant) loss of quality? Just for reference, the cable modem would only need to pull around 10-20 mbps from the cable. Splitters seem to be a bad word when it comes to networking.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
For those of you wondering before, I meant to type Cat6 and then had a brainfart and added the "e" at the end. MYSTERY SOLVED. In any case, I can't do any sort of cabling at all, which I was looking for MoCA solutions. Anyways, does anyone have any recommendations regarding home-use NAS? Right now all my media content is hosted on my computer, and streamed to my jailbroken ATV running XBMC, and I'd like to move all that to an external drive hooked directly into the router. I'm looking for something that is 1TB or bigger, can plug straight to ethernet, does SMB and/or FTP. Ideally, it would also be aesthetically pleasing enough to sit next to the TV and not look horribly out of place, super bonus mega points if I can shut off or dim any annoying lights.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2013 22:22
|
|
|
Dogen posted:You might check out the NAS thread. Were your moca questions suitably answered? Ah, sorry, I thought the NAS thread was only for enterprise hardware, I'll post there then. I ended up relocating most of my hardware and somehow managed to make everything work with just the powerline adapters I already had (with decent enough speeds), so I'm putting the whole MoCA deal on hold for now. Hopefully by the time I need to upgrade my network I'll be in a new place where I can wire everything with Cat6. Are you happy with MoCA performance, though? What kind of speeds are you getting?
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
I'm trying to fragment my network right now so that only PCs physically wired to it can access shared files/the server, while wireless clients only get internet. My setup so far had been as follows. Modem -> Linksys WRT54G2 -> various devices (wired and wireless) What I've done right now is turn off wireless access on the WRT54G and plugged in a separate router into one of the WRT54Gs ports (using the second router's WAN port), set it on a different subnet (eg: the WRT54G is 192.168.1.1, and the new router is 192.168.2.1), and let that second router hand out IPs on its own subnet. So now it goes: Modem -> Linksys WRT54G2 -> wired devices -> generic router on different subnet -> wireless devices. This apparently works. I get internet on all wireless devices but they don't see any of the wired devices (at least from Windows). Is this enough, or will someone with a minimum of networking skills be able to bypass that limitation? Is there any "correct" way of doing this?
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2013 22:07
|
|
|
Fly posted:This won't block IP traffic to the wired devices network unless you add some IP tables rules such that the "generic router" doesn't allow it's devices to talk to any of the local (RFC 1918) networks. Is there any way to do this via protocol blocking? The router has a few options regarding that. Worst comes to worst, I don't have much of a problem with getting a better router that could do this. In fact, I originally was going to buy a Linksys E900 and set it on Bridge-Repeater mode, but just as I was to buy it I found the old generic router (it's an Encore ENHWI-G3, in case anyone was wondering) and decided to see if I could save myself a few bucks.
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
I have to ask. Are the 30/30/30 resets that DDWRT constantly asks for in its Wiki really necessary? I swear to God it sometimes feels like out of 60 minutes I spend configuring a router, 30 of those are spent holding the reset button.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
THF13 posted:Dumb stuff you should stop doing My girlfriend's work laptop is forced to run Windows XP due to some legacy applications. For whatever reason, even though it has SP3 on, the wifi card simply won't connect to any network that has encryption stronger than WEP. To make matters worse, the whole system is locked down so that I can't update her loving drivers and/or troubleshoot her computer in any significant way, and no amount of bitching to the IT guys at her job will make them upgrade her card/drivers. Conclusion, I had downgrade her wifi security at home to WEP so that she can work at home and the only thing I could do as any semblance of "security" was hide the SSID and set up a mac address filter. It feels disturbingly similar to hiding from the monsters by covering myself with a blanket. Fortunately she is in a 14th floor in a congested zone so her signal doesn't reach the street, which means I only have to worry about her neighbours, and not drive-by hacking.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2013 17:21
|
|
|
Jan posted:poo poo, I'd use a VM over using WEP. Though I doubt the problem here is XP SP3 as much as the laptop itself. The laptop is actually a fairly new Lenovo (E Series iirc) that originally came with Windows 7 and got downgraded to XP because of the legacy app. I'm going to get her a new router, flash it with DDWRT, and set up a VLAN for her so that at least she doesn't put every other device in the network at risk. The worst part is that we're talking a big-rear end multinational corporation. At the very least you'd think they'd worry about what kind of nasty malware she could be bringing in to the corporate network, but nope. Then again, last week my girlfriend brought home a pendrive she got at a company event, she gave it to me, and when I plugged it in MSE immediately popped up an infection warning :facepalm: dpkg chopra fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Aug 14, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2013 21:05
|
|
|
I'm having kind of a dumb problem. Some time ago, I set up a router running DDWRT as a DHCP forwarder since it was acting as a switch/repeater. Because I have absolutely no foresight, I never wrote down the router's IP address (the one I'd use to enter the admin console), and since it's on DHCP forwarding mode, the client's IP address is always related to the main router, not the "switch one". Any suggestions?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Does anyone use DDWRT for network printing? I have an old-ish HP Laserjet hooked up and after some initial setup tinkering, it works perfectly, but the process for adding the printer to Windows is a loving hassle (I basically have to manually add it by IP). I'm using this in a small office environment, so I'll occasionally have to add new people to the network and setup the printer for them. Is there any way to have DDWRT broadcast the printer to the network so that clients can see it and connect automatically? Super bonus points if I could store the basic drivers somehow so that I don't to add them, but that might not be feasible given that I doubt the router has enough memory for that. dpkg chopra fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Sep 12, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
I currently have an Asus RT N-16. I'd like to have two wireless networks, one that uses a VPN, and one that doesn't. Is that possible? I'm used to DDWRT but I have no problem flashing other firmwares.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2014 00:22
|
|
|
I need a device that will be wired to my router and just needs to act as a switch/wifi repeater. My main router will handle DHCP. Should I just get any cheap router or are there even cheaper dedicated devices for this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
SamDabbers posted:http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-SG1005D-1000Mbps-Gigabit-Capacity/dp/B000N99BBC Sorry, I guess I should've clarified. This is for home-use. I just need to hook up the TV in the bedroom + get wifi in bed because right now the signal is kind of lovely. I honestly just need a switch with integrated wifi. Edit: alternatively, what is a cheap but decent router that has N wi-fi? dpkg chopra fucked around with this message at 04:36 on Oct 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
Tapedump posted:Edit: Yeah, you could get a router, turn off DHCP et all and make it act as an AP... but then you should have just got the AP in the first place. I need the AP but I also need the wired connections (well, I don't need them, but wired is always better). It seemed to me like a simple AP with 4 integrated LAN ports was a more straight forward and elegant solution rather than a wifi AP + a switch as two separate devices, especially when the AP is just gonna serve as a DHCP forwarder so it's not like it has to be a beefy device. I think I'll just use get a cheap router and use that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
Is there any disadvantage to having a repeater's SSID/password be the same as the router's SSID/password? I'm worried devices will freak out and switch back and forth between one and the other, dropping packets along the way, or something like that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2014 05:07
|
|
|
My current home network looks something like this: MODEM -> ASUS RT-N16 (Stock) -> MOCA -> Linksys E900 (with DDWRT) Each router serves two distinct areas (living room and bedroom) that due to walls in between cannot really see each other via wi-fi. Each room has a smart TV + other connected devices. Originally I had the E900 as DHCP forwarder and all devices were served by the RT-N16. However, because the MOCA connection is not the best, I'd like to have each router and its connected devices on their own subnet, so that if I want to stream content from my tablet to my TV in the bedroom, it doesn't have to go through the MOCA, into the main router, back through the MOCA and back to the bedroom TV. The problem is that with this setup, my devices in the living room can't see the devices in the bedroom. E.G.: I can't stream to the Chromecast in the living room from the bedroom because my tablet won't detect it, or if I'm in the bedroom I can't connect to my living room computer's plex servers. Is there wany way around this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
I'm having a dumb problem. I have an Asus N66U at work with the VPN enabled via PPTP. At home I have a Windows 8.1 laptop and an Asus RT-N16. I can connect to my work VPN fine, but I need to access the Work router config page. However, both my work router and my home router have the same Gateway IP (192.168.1.1). So now when I type 192.168.1.1 in my address bar at home, it still tries to take me to my home router's config page, regardless of the fact that it's connected to the work VPN. Is there any way around this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2014 03:46
|
|
|
Farchanter posted:I'm in a new house, and I'm on Fios for the first time. Things have been generally good, but there's one room in the house that the wifi from the Actiontec Verizon router/modem combo just will not reach. The bathroom is between the router and this room, and through some highly unscientific experimentation, I think that the wifi just has a really hard time penetrating something in the bathroom. I think whoever had the place previously must have had the same problem, because there's a second coax line in the house, running under the carpet from where the router currently is up into the room where we can't get wireless. Setting up the router in there introduces the opposite problem, of course. Just use any MoCA adapter (they create a network connection via coaxial cables) to connect both sides of the house and plug in a wireless AP or a second router on the other end to get wifi.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 13:22
|
|
|
So, basically, if you live in an apartment building you are hosed?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
I have an Asus RT-N66U. I've just stumbled across this article which explains how to install certificates within the router itself when using the Merlin firmware. What exactly is the use of this? Would this enable me to avoid having to install private certificates in each machine?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
Make sure your PC, a) b) can connect to your new router via GigE (this shouldn't be a problem as long as your motherboard is less than 5 years old and the cable that connects the PC to the router is Cat5e or better), or else you're going to have a new bottleneck at both those points. Also, I don't know if there's any speed issues when transferring files via SMB (which is the protocol via which the Mac and Windows PC are most likely connecting). I'll let someone else field that one. Networking is a bitch, basically. Edit: you might also consider getting an AC router that supports USB 3 and a new external drive with a USB3 connection. That way you can just plug in the new external drive to the router, and skip the PC step entirely. dpkg chopra fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Nov 18, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
If whatever application you are using supports it, you could also use a Dynamic DNS service. What that does is basically give you your own domain name. So instead of giving someone your IP you give them a web address (e.g.: http://yourname.freedns.com). The service will provide you with special software which will update your domain every time your ip changes. So even if your IP changes 20 times, anyone typing http://yourname.freedns.com will always be able to reach you. IIRC there's a free, Goon-Run service that does this at: https://freedns.afraid.org/signup/moreinfo/
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2014 12:53
|
|
|
I think that seamless transition within wifi networks is something that only something like the Ubiquiti Zero-Handoff APs can manage. Asus routers also have a special setting in their Wi-Fi config page called "Roaming Setting", which basically disconnects clients if their signal-to-noise goes under a certain threshold. That way you avoid phones connecting to a router that is farther away but have a stronger signal. I've only just discovered this so I can't speak for it's effectivity, however.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 19:27
|
|
|
Topsy Kretts posted:Can someone tell me the technical term for what I want to achieve? I have fios at my apartment, but due to the way the building is put together the connection has to come into my place as coax (so no enabling ethernet for me). Therefore I am stuck with the ActionTec that verizon provides. I am currently using my dd-wrt enabling buffalo along with it but its a bit clumsy because if I want to enable port forwarding I have to do it both on the ActionTec and the buffalo. I would like to configure the ActionTec to basically function as a cable modem and let me use my buffalo for everything else. I think this means setting up the ActionTec as a bridge or something similar? I am not sure what keywords I need to google. Thoughts? What you're looking for is usually called DMZ (as in Demilitarized Zone) in router configs. It's usually in the Firewall/NAT/Port Forwarding config page.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
kid sinister posted:Hmm, looks interesting. Is that thing a router and firewall too, or just a modem? If you don't need something quite as professional as that, most newer Asus Routers can connect via a 3G/4G USB modem on stock firmware. You won't be able to stick it out on the roof for maximum connectivity, like the Pepwave, but if you have decent enough signal indoors, it should work.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
kdevil II posted:I am actually looking for the same thing with the addition of wanting network B to have a VPN client option so I can connect to my VPN once and have all devices that connect to B to tunnel through my VPN. If I remember correctly, DDWRT can do both of these things with fairly little configuration. Look under Wireless Repeater mode for the first one, and under regular VPN settings for the second one. I'd imagine running both at the same time is gonna be processor intensive, though.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2015 04:04
|
|
|
Is running the native Asus RT-N66U Open VPN server A Good Idea? I just need it for a small 4 person office so that people can remote in when they're offsite or in a public network. I basically set the VPN switch to on, added 4 users with strong passwords and then just left on the basic settings. Is there anything I should enable/disable to make sure I don't get hit by some dumb config exploit?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
Not technically a "home" networking question, but I can't find a more appropriate thread for this and I don't think it's worth it's own thread. Our small office of 4 people has 4 analog landlines connected to an IP-PBX which manages our IP phones (5 phones + a couple of iphones that connect via the Bria app). We're about to move to a new location and our internet/phone provider tells me that they don't offer analog lines at that location, only IP lines. I talked to the guy that sold us and set up our PBX/ip phones and he tells me that if I'm moving to IP telephony then I should no longer need 4 different lines (ie: 4 different phone numbers), that I can just ask for a single IP line (ie: 1 phone number) with "4 channels", meaning that I should be able to receive or place up to 4 concurrent calls on that one line. I asked the telephone company about this and they gave me a convoluted answer where he basically tried to sell me on their "virtual PBX" (ie: throw away my IP-PBX and just point my phones at their servers). When pressed, the tech finally told me that what I'm asking for is possible if I get a "dedicated SIP connection" but that that's usually something done by people with 15 or more extensions. I was wondering if someone could point out whether I'm getting jerked around by my phone provider, the guy the sold me the PBX, or both.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2015 17:55
|
|
|
If the concurrent use of devices behind a switch is maxing out the uplink connection (eg: 2 computers are both trying to upload/download more than 100mbps over a single 100mbps connection), will a normal commercial switch usually load balance the connections or will it try to push through whatever it can and drop packets for the rest? I ask because I have to add a few machines behind a switch over a 10/100 Ethernet connection and while I don't mind them occasionally having to deal with slower speeds, dropped packages would be an issue.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Speaking of network topology, I'm about to wire our new small office (5 people, less than 20 devices at one time). Our setup is basically MODEM -> ROUTER -> SWITCH -> COMPUTERS/PBX/IP TELEPHONES. Everything is wired on Cat5e (I will be switching out to Cat 6 within a few months, it's just not a priority). Assuming an edge case where two or three people are trying to send/receive large files over the network at the same time and max out the (LAN) uplink on the switch, is there any point in plugging in the PBX/phones directly into the router or will the switch automatically load balance so that packets don't start dropping?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Long story short, while loving around with a crimper for the first time in my life I hosed up and ended up wiring one end (female wall outlets) with the A standard, and the other end (male plugs) with the B standard, basically making a whole bunch of crossover cables (except male-female instead of male-male). Reading a bit about cabling, it seems that most modern devices/computers should natively support crossover cables without making much of a fuss and a cursory test with my laptop gave me a connection to the router and an IP. Is it worth recrimping the 10-odd cables I've already done?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 04:36
|
|
|
Rexxed posted:I probably would redo them just in case you don't have something with auto mdix that gets plugged in. Most modern stuff does adapt but you never know if you might be using a power over ethernet device (some aren't standard and use different wires) that could get hosed up and send power to the wrong pins on the other side. PoE shouldn't do that, but companies do weird poo poo. It does get faster with practice. Thanks for the answer! I'll take some time and redo it then. One question: if the female side is A, the whatever cable I use to plug in a device to that jack has to be A as well, right? I ask because for the most part I have whatever cables came with the device I bought and short of physically checking the wiring in each one I don't know what type each one is.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
flosofl posted:Right but I think this time he was asking if he has both termination points in his runs as 568-A, does it matter if his patch cables are using 568-A or 568-B. That answer is no. Yeah, that's it  . I'm gonna redo the cables so that they're all the same standard at each end and was just worried that I would have to replace all my patch cables.Inspector_666 posted:I would just redo the female ends since that's much easier and doesn't require cutting any of the cable off. Is it easier? For whatever reason I assumed switching out the female jacks was harder than just crimping a new male jack.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
flosofl posted:Did you use keystones, or it is actually a block of 110 with an RJ45 receptacle on the other side? Redoing a keystone is stupid easy even without a ton of slack in the cable. 110 on a faceplate with little slack in the cable will make you curse the gods. I was redoing old wiring which already had keystones/jacks set up on the wall. I just thought that once you pressed down the keystone you couldn't reuse it, like you can't reuse an rj-45 plug.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Is there any way, on a SOHO network running a RT-N66U, to set up some sort of DNS system that allows devices to connect to one address and automatically recognize whether the connection is coming from inside the network or from the Internet? IE: I want out softphones to connect to 192.168.1.1 when I'm at the office, and to myofficeip.com when I'm off-site. If it was just PCs I would edit the hosts file, but some of these are mobile apps as well so I'm guessing I need something more complex.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 04:57
|
|
|
Yeah, I suppose the VPN solution is the simplest although I have 0 faith in users actually figuring out the two extra actions involved in enabling the VPN before opening the softphones. Thanks for the suggestions!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2015 14:45
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 23:42 |
|
|
NebZ posted:hi goons, router question: With Linksys routers, if you were able to get the router to assign you an IP, you could use TFTP to connect to them and upload a basic version of the firmware which would then let you upload a complete version. Look up TFTP flashing for your router and see if's supported.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 03:22
|
|