- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
Recently had Verizon DSL installed here, Westell 2200, no problem hooking primary host computer directly to DSL and accessing internet. (Although was a bit surprised that the line was only provisioned for 768/128, but that's another issue I have to get resolved with VZ.)
My problem is, originally, the plan was to get the LinkSys WRT54G wireless router, and a USB 2.0 'g' NIC, to network two computers in seperate rooms without running a huge cable. In the quest to find a cheaper 'g' NIC late on a Sunday, a "Network Everywhere" 'b' kit, with both a 4-port + wireless 'b' router, and a 'b' PCMCIA nic was found (for only $50). Since I have a third computer (laptop) here that I eventually wanted to network, and considering the price of USB 2.0 wireless NICs, I figured that it would be cheaper to buy the kit, and use two wireless routers to talk to each other, and then using the PCMCIA NIC for the laptop, and everything would be groovy. Easier said than done.
I cannot seem to get the two routers to talk to each other, or route IP traffic, wirelessly, no matter what I try. I've disabled the DHCP on both of them, set the channels to the same (default channel 6), changed the SSID to the same 'wireless' keyword, set the 'g' router to 'b' mode, disabled WEP/WAP, set SSID broadcast to 'on' on both of them, gave them a fixed (but different) IP address, changed them both from "gateway" to "router" mode.. I just don't get it.
What do I need to do, to get two wireless routers to talk to each other? Am I missing something, doing something wrong, or is there some sort of firmware limitation that I am running into here? I thought that nearly all (and LinkSys in particular) could be changed from a wireless router into effectively an access point. All of the non-brand-specific guides to doing this on the internet, simply say to not connect anything to the WAN port, and to disable the DHCP server, etc. and it will work. So far, that hasn't worked for me.
I'm also curious, where I could find updated firmware for the "Network Everywhere" model. It's LinkSys/Cisco hardware inside, and the hardware seems quite similar to the regular LinkSys 4-port + wireless 'b' router. However, going to the NetworkEverywhere site and checking the firmware downloads, although they mention four models of wireless routers, there is only one firmware download link, and the pictures of the model associated with it are totally different than the look of this router. The one that they picture is obviously a newer model, in a metal rather than plastic case, looks more like a Netgear wired router than a LinkSys, whereas my router looks like a traditional LinkSys, except with red coloring instead of blue.
I'm pretty clued as to normal networking, ethernet, TCP/IP, IPX, NetBEUI, etc., but this has got me scratching my head. I figured that if I can find the proper firmware upgrade for one or both of these routers I might be able to make some more progress. At some point in the future, I was thinking of installing the Sveasoft firmware into the WRT54G, but after seeing the recent changes that they made to their licensing, I don't think that I really trust them. I might just run the HyperWRT firmware instead, and compile the changes in myself.
One other thing that I thought was kind of strangely lacking, is that the LinkSys WAP54G can show other detected networks and their signal strengths, and yet the WRT54G lacks that feature, even though they are based on the exact same hardware. I'm wondering if I dare attempt to cross-flash to the WAP54G firmware, as that is more along the lines of how I'm now intending to use this device.
Also wondering if there is a third-party tool to use to backup current firmware before flashing, since the version numbering of the "Network Everywhere" router doesn't seem to match with the normal LinkSys firmware versions.
Edit (conclusion):
Well, after doing some serious reading on this subject online, I've come to the sad conclusion that it simply cannot be done, and that the mfg's of these consumer-level devices are rather misleading about the claims of their devices, and would rather that you shell out several additional hundred dollors for additional devices that serve different roles within the network, yet are built on identical hardware platforms, and simply have slightly differently-crippled firmware residing within. So sad, this form of market exploitation.
For example - LinkSys sells three very-similar 802.11g wireless devices:
1) WRT54G - Wireless-G Broadband Router
2) WAP54G - Wireless-G Access Point
3) WET54GS5 - Wireless-G Ethernet Bridge with 5-port Switch
Note that those are listed in order of *increasing* MSRP.
But if you look at the advertising copy, it appears that the higher-priced devices, actually have *less* overall functionality. (Not entirely true, but from the ad-copy it looks that way.)
For example, the WET54GS5, is a wireless ethernet bridge, which requires no drivers, and does not support router/NAT functionality.
Now lets look at the WAP54G.
Hmm, it seems to mention that same "cable-less cable" functionality, so it should be a super-set of the functionality of the WET54GS5, should it not?
Now lets look at the WRT54G.
Oh wow, look at that - three devices in one! If only it were actually true.
From that ad copy, it appears that the WRT54G, which is generally the cheapest devices out of the three, includes not only the functionality of the (WAP54G) Wireless Access Point, but also a Switch, and plus, Router functionality, which isn't mentioned as a feature of the two prior devices. Logically, since the WAP54G includes the functionality of the WET54GS5 Wireless Ethernet Bridge, then shouldn't the WRT54G include all of these features? Especially since it is proven that the WAP54G and WRT54G are the exact same hardware platform inside.
So the consumer reads over the contents of the boxes, and concludes that the WRT54G is the superior choice, purchases it, and takes it home. Upon installation, what is found out? LinkSys was very misleading in their ad copy. There is no support for wireless ethernet bridging mode on this device, which is apparently what is required to allow "wireless routers" to talk directly to each other, wirelessly.
Basically, in technical terms, you can make the WRT54G operate in much the same manner as a plain "Access Point" device by disabling the NAT firewall and DHCP server, however it is still fixed in "Infrastructure mode", and infrastructure-mode devices can only talk to wireless client devices also operating in infrastructure-mode, not to any other AP devices in infrastructure mode. (Basically, "infrastructure-mode" devices are one-way only, clients can connect into the access point, but the access point cannot connect out. "Ad-hoc mode" devices are two-way, apparently.)
Perhaps this is old-hat to those of you out there familiar with WiFi, but for someone, well-versed in wired ethernet networking, making a first foray into 802.11 wireless, this was both a shock and highly disappointing. In "traditional" ethernet, every node connected physically on a subnet with another node could talk to one another. Not so in 802.11 wireless, you need to have different devices for different roles within the network. It's definately far from "plug and play", like the good old days. This is even before you start getting into the different protocol enhancements and (incompatible) speed boosts that each mfg adds in an attempt to seem more advanced than another, and the differences in security layers implemented in different products.
WiFi may be a "hot topic" in the news, but it's still not ready for "prime time", IMHO, until they get the incompatibility kinks worked out. You should be able to purchase WiFi device A and device B and simply connect them together, period. Anything less will breed customer disappointment.
Edit 2: Oh yes, I forgot to mention - for the more conspiratorially-minded among us, here's something about LinkSys/Cisco to chew on too - their newest firmware updates for the WRT54G (as reported on DSLR), seems to significantly reduce the output power of the device, resulting in markedly weaker connections. Could that simply be a coincedence, that the power-reduced firmware was released just as LinkSys announced their new high-gain antennae products for sale?
Nah... Cisco would never do something as underhanded (and greedy) as that... would they?
Or that LinkSys now wants to charge a monthly fee for use of a feature that is built-in to the hardware that you already purchased?
(Update: Apparently not entirely true - again, with the misleading LinkSys/Cisco ad-copy - Their site states "Access to the powerful security of the Linksys Wireless Guard service is built right into your Linksys Access Point -- you won't need any additional hardware, software, or consulting." After you read that, wouldn't you be given the impression that the feature was built-in to the device, and not require any additional "consulting"? No-where on that whole page does it indicate that it requires outsourcing of a service on a continual basis to LinkSys, but this link tells the rest of the story. It appears simply to be an outsourced RADIUS server arrangement.)
Edit(2004-08-03): Found out some more info - the requirement for two wireless routers to talk to each other, is called "WDS", and either point-to-multipoint, or "infrastructure AP Client mode", if you want one router to act like a client to talk to another router in "infrastructure AP mode". Also found out that WDS isn't a real standard, and different companies implement it different ways, so it's basically a prayer if it works at all, unless you purchase multiple, identical, devices. So much for "WiFi compatibility", anyways. The good news - the two devices that I have apparently both have this capability, with a little bit of 3rd-party firmware twiddling. Still don't know if they are compatible with each other though.
Edit (2004-08-14): Want to hear something sad? I did a Google search for more information on my Network Everywhere router, which has an FCC ID of Q87-NWK11B, and guess what? The ONLY page that I found... was THIS post. Am I the only person on the planet that owns one of these things? Surely, it can't be... ?
My problem is, originally, the plan was to get the LinkSys WRT54G wireless router, and a USB 2.0 'g' NIC, to network two computers in seperate rooms without running a huge cable. In the quest to find a cheaper 'g' NIC late on a Sunday, a "Network Everywhere" 'b' kit, with both a 4-port + wireless 'b' router, and a 'b' PCMCIA nic was found (for only $50). Since I have a third computer (laptop) here that I eventually wanted to network, and considering the price of USB 2.0 wireless NICs, I figured that it would be cheaper to buy the kit, and use two wireless routers to talk to each other, and then using the PCMCIA NIC for the laptop, and everything would be groovy. Easier said than done.
I cannot seem to get the two routers to talk to each other, or route IP traffic, wirelessly, no matter what I try. I've disabled the DHCP on both of them, set the channels to the same (default channel 6), changed the SSID to the same 'wireless' keyword, set the 'g' router to 'b' mode, disabled WEP/WAP, set SSID broadcast to 'on' on both of them, gave them a fixed (but different) IP address, changed them both from "gateway" to "router" mode.. I just don't get it.
What do I need to do, to get two wireless routers to talk to each other? Am I missing something, doing something wrong, or is there some sort of firmware limitation that I am running into here? I thought that nearly all (and LinkSys in particular) could be changed from a wireless router into effectively an access point. All of the non-brand-specific guides to doing this on the internet, simply say to not connect anything to the WAN port, and to disable the DHCP server, etc. and it will work. So far, that hasn't worked for me.
I'm also curious, where I could find updated firmware for the "Network Everywhere" model. It's LinkSys/Cisco hardware inside, and the hardware seems quite similar to the regular LinkSys 4-port + wireless 'b' router. However, going to the NetworkEverywhere site and checking the firmware downloads, although they mention four models of wireless routers, there is only one firmware download link, and the pictures of the model associated with it are totally different than the look of this router. The one that they picture is obviously a newer model, in a metal rather than plastic case, looks more like a Netgear wired router than a LinkSys, whereas my router looks like a traditional LinkSys, except with red coloring instead of blue.
I'm pretty clued as to normal networking, ethernet, TCP/IP, IPX, NetBEUI, etc., but this has got me scratching my head. I figured that if I can find the proper firmware upgrade for one or both of these routers I might be able to make some more progress. At some point in the future, I was thinking of installing the Sveasoft firmware into the WRT54G, but after seeing the recent changes that they made to their licensing, I don't think that I really trust them. I might just run the HyperWRT firmware instead, and compile the changes in myself.
One other thing that I thought was kind of strangely lacking, is that the LinkSys WAP54G can show other detected networks and their signal strengths, and yet the WRT54G lacks that feature, even though they are based on the exact same hardware. I'm wondering if I dare attempt to cross-flash to the WAP54G firmware, as that is more along the lines of how I'm now intending to use this device.
Also wondering if there is a third-party tool to use to backup current firmware before flashing, since the version numbering of the "Network Everywhere" router doesn't seem to match with the normal LinkSys firmware versions.
Edit (conclusion):
Well, after doing some serious reading on this subject online, I've come to the sad conclusion that it simply cannot be done, and that the mfg's of these consumer-level devices are rather misleading about the claims of their devices, and would rather that you shell out several additional hundred dollors for additional devices that serve different roles within the network, yet are built on identical hardware platforms, and simply have slightly differently-crippled firmware residing within. So sad, this form of market exploitation.
For example - LinkSys sells three very-similar 802.11g wireless devices:
1) WRT54G - Wireless-G Broadband Router
2) WAP54G - Wireless-G Access Point
3) WET54GS5 - Wireless-G Ethernet Bridge with 5-port Switch
Note that those are listed in order of *increasing* MSRP.
But if you look at the advertising copy, it appears that the higher-priced devices, actually have *less* overall functionality. (Not entirely true, but from the ad-copy it looks that way.)
For example, the WET54GS5, is a wireless ethernet bridge, which requires no drivers, and does not support router/NAT functionality.
Now lets look at the WAP54G.
Ok, so that will allow wireless clients to connect to a wired network, and is compatible with both 'b' and 'g' devices, check.
Hmm, it seems to mention that same "cable-less cable" functionality, so it should be a super-set of the functionality of the WET54GS5, should it not?
Now lets look at the WRT54G.
Oh wow, look at that - three devices in one! If only it were actually true.
From that ad copy, it appears that the WRT54G, which is generally the cheapest devices out of the three, includes not only the functionality of the (WAP54G) Wireless Access Point, but also a Switch, and plus, Router functionality, which isn't mentioned as a feature of the two prior devices. Logically, since the WAP54G includes the functionality of the WET54GS5 Wireless Ethernet Bridge, then shouldn't the WRT54G include all of these features? Especially since it is proven that the WAP54G and WRT54G are the exact same hardware platform inside.
So the consumer reads over the contents of the boxes, and concludes that the WRT54G is the superior choice, purchases it, and takes it home. Upon installation, what is found out? LinkSys was very misleading in their ad copy. There is no support for wireless ethernet bridging mode on this device, which is apparently what is required to allow "wireless routers" to talk directly to each other, wirelessly.
Basically, in technical terms, you can make the WRT54G operate in much the same manner as a plain "Access Point" device by disabling the NAT firewall and DHCP server, however it is still fixed in "Infrastructure mode", and infrastructure-mode devices can only talk to wireless client devices also operating in infrastructure-mode, not to any other AP devices in infrastructure mode. (Basically, "infrastructure-mode" devices are one-way only, clients can connect into the access point, but the access point cannot connect out. "Ad-hoc mode" devices are two-way, apparently.)
Perhaps this is old-hat to those of you out there familiar with WiFi, but for someone, well-versed in wired ethernet networking, making a first foray into 802.11 wireless, this was both a shock and highly disappointing. In "traditional" ethernet, every node connected physically on a subnet with another node could talk to one another. Not so in 802.11 wireless, you need to have different devices for different roles within the network. It's definately far from "plug and play", like the good old days. This is even before you start getting into the different protocol enhancements and (incompatible) speed boosts that each mfg adds in an attempt to seem more advanced than another, and the differences in security layers implemented in different products.
WiFi may be a "hot topic" in the news, but it's still not ready for "prime time", IMHO, until they get the incompatibility kinks worked out. You should be able to purchase WiFi device A and device B and simply connect them together, period. Anything less will breed customer disappointment.
Edit 2: Oh yes, I forgot to mention - for the more conspiratorially-minded among us, here's something about LinkSys/Cisco to chew on too - their newest firmware updates for the WRT54G (as reported on DSLR), seems to significantly reduce the output power of the device, resulting in markedly weaker connections. Could that simply be a coincedence, that the power-reduced firmware was released just as LinkSys announced their new high-gain antennae products for sale?
Nah... Cisco would never do something as underhanded (and greedy) as that... would they?
Or that LinkSys now wants to charge a monthly fee for use of a feature that is built-in to the hardware that you already purchased?
(Update: Apparently not entirely true - again, with the misleading LinkSys/Cisco ad-copy - Their site states "Access to the powerful security of the Linksys Wireless Guard service is built right into your Linksys Access Point -- you won't need any additional hardware, software, or consulting." After you read that, wouldn't you be given the impression that the feature was built-in to the device, and not require any additional "consulting"? No-where on that whole page does it indicate that it requires outsourcing of a service on a continual basis to LinkSys, but this link tells the rest of the story. It appears simply to be an outsourced RADIUS server arrangement.)
Edit(2004-08-03): Found out some more info - the requirement for two wireless routers to talk to each other, is called "WDS", and either point-to-multipoint, or "infrastructure AP Client mode", if you want one router to act like a client to talk to another router in "infrastructure AP mode". Also found out that WDS isn't a real standard, and different companies implement it different ways, so it's basically a prayer if it works at all, unless you purchase multiple, identical, devices. So much for "WiFi compatibility", anyways. The good news - the two devices that I have apparently both have this capability, with a little bit of 3rd-party firmware twiddling. Still don't know if they are compatible with each other though.
Edit (2004-08-14): Want to hear something sad? I did a Google search for more information on my Network Everywhere router, which has an FCC ID of Q87-NWK11B, and guess what? The ONLY page that I found... was THIS post. Am I the only person on the planet that owns one of these things? Surely, it can't be... ?
Facebook
Twitter