Question Will External Wireless Router Work Well Using RG Ethernet Port?

[RhoXS]

I am not satisfied with the AT&T Uverse RG WiFi performance. Simply turning off the RG's 2.5 & 5 GHz WiFi feature (via the 192.168.1.25 configuration dialog) and plugging a good wireless router into one of the Ethernet ports seems to me to be a simple method of significantly improving WiFi performance in my home. Will this indeed work? (In another post I asked for a reccomendation for a high performance wireless router)

 

[superphb]

Perhaps not a wireless router. A wireless access point would be best. There are any number of home and SMB wifi APs that you could buy to significantly improve your wifi coverage.

Configuring them is generally fairly straightaway.

 

[mxnerd]

So what's wrong with another thread?

Of course you can link up another wifi router, but instead using it as router, you use it as AP.

You just have to link one of the new router's LAN port (not WAN port) to your gateway, use a tape to cover the WAN port so you will not connect to the wrong port. Be sure not to use the same LAN IP as your gateway.

If you firmly believe that your gateway's Wi-Fi was the culprit, just buy any router that has good review on Amazon, not necessarily what I recommended in another thread.

 

[JackMDS]

As said above and the other thread, the best solution is to get an AP or second Wireless Router configured as an Access Point.

Using Wireless Routers (or Modem/Wireless Router) as a Switch with an Access Point - http://www.ezlan.net/router_AP.html

If going in the middle (between expensive and in expensive) I would use this -

https://www.amazon.com/TP-Link-AC17...FTZJGFEFFQE&psc=1&refRID=4NTPY27G0FTZJGFEFFQE


----
P.S. You previus thread is locked sine ther is No reason to mainatin two threads on the same issue.

 

[RhoXS]

Am I correct in assuming a AP is simply a wireless router without the switch (ie. no ethernet ports except for the input)?

 

[mxnerd]

Am I correct in assuming a AP is simply a wireless router without the switch (ie. no ethernet ports except for the input)?

No. Pure AP has no routing capability , with ethernet ports or not.

Most people just buy routers and don't use their routing functions (use LAN to LAN connection instead) since it's hard to find pure AP in the past.

The advantage of using a router as an AP is that if the main router goes down, you can replace the main router with router-turned-AP in the emergency, it's good to have a backup. (if the gateway is not a modem/router combo)

 

[RhoXS]

Thanks. So am I correct in understanding I can buy a TP-link Archer AC2300 or similar and just connect its blue "Internet" port to one of the RG's ethernet ports, turn both of the RG's wireless adapters off, and the AC2300 is then effectively a wireless AP?

 

[mxnerd]

Blue port is WAN. Don't use it. If you use it, it becomes double NAT (2 levels of private network). The devices connected to RG and the devices connected to Archer can't talk to each other.

You have to use one of the LAN (yellow) ports.

When configuring Archer, just set it's WAN to DHCP IP address but don't connect the WAN port to anything and cover it with a tape.

Then turn off RG's wireless fuction off and you have an Archer AP.

if RG's gateway's LAN IP is 192.168.1.254, you can set Archer's LAN IP as 192.168.1.253. they have to be in the same IP range.

 

[RhoXS]

You stated "just set it's WAN to DHCP IP address ". How do I know this address? The RG provides the address for accessing the configuration menus but I doubt this is what you are referring to.

 

[mxnerd]

You stated "just set it's WAN to DHCP IP address ". How do I know this address? The RG provides the address for accessing the configuration menus but I doubt this is what you are referring to.

I meant when you are configuring Archer, not RG. And you don't need to know/care what WAN's DHCP IP address it will be since you don't use it for routing.

 

[RhoXS]

OK. I truly appreciate your help. I am ordering the router now. Decided on the TP-Link AC5400 as probably a better performer than the AC2300. Its worth the gamble if it can end all the glitches, especially with the Nest thermostat not reliably receiving the signal from my phone that I am away from home.

I also have a problem with the wireless Uverse set top boxes once or twice a week suddenly loosing communication with the DVR. These wireless STB's appear to communicate with the RG or DVR using its own wireless protocol as I have never had to enter the wireless password. Therefore I don't know if a quality external AP will adress this issue.

Thanks again.

 

[JackMDS]

Am I correct in assuming a AP is simply a wireless router without the switch (ie. no ethernet ports except for the input)?

The answer is Yes and No.

For most End users, yeah a AP is like wireless router without the switch..

As "Strange that it sound APs that by design do not have a Routing circuits and multi switch ports and have similar Wireless Power to a Wireless Routers, are usualy more expensive than Wireless Routers.

Why? because many APs might be some other differences that are exisitng in tyypical Wireless Routers.

Some APs are POE capable, and have Bridge and Repeater capacities that are not supported by many Wireless Router.

 

[superphb]

It'd be simpler to use an AP tbh. I understand the argument that if you buy a router then you have a backup but certainly in the UK, just having a look on amazon, a decent modem router is twice or three times the cost of a decent access point.

 

[RhoXS]

I have a TP-Link AC5400 arriving Sunday. Will install it on Tuesday. Will let you all know how it works out. Again, I appreciate all the advice above as networking is only a subject I dive into when there is a need and each time there appears to be a new can of alphabet soup to make sense of.