Wireless AccessPonit to AccessPoint

[DVader]

I have a wireless D-link DL-624 Router setup as the main router and wireless access point. If I setup an older DL-614+ router Access point will they communicate with each other over the wireless. I will have a computer WIRED to the switch portion of the DL-614+ will it be able to see the DL-624 and the computers and wan attached to it?

ie

Computer wired To DL-614+ -------Wirerless To-------> DL-624

Anything special needed to set this up? Basically I want to use the DL-614+ like a Wireless NIC.

[Gollo]

I don't think you can. Update the 614's firmware to the latest and check for an option to act as a repeater (or something along these lines). You might check the 624 for the feature as you might have to do it the other way around. But if memory serves me the dlinks didn't offer the repeat feature (at least the 614 that I owned for all of 15 minutes). If you were to purchase one of the dlink ap only (with out the routing functions) MAYBE they have this feature to act as a repeater. Linksys I know offers this feature but you can't mix brands while in repeater mode. Cheers.

[confus-ed]

I don't think you can. Update the 614's firmware to the latest and check for an option to act as a repeater (or something along these lines). You might check the 624 for the feature as you might have to do it the other way around. But if memory serves me the dlinks didn't offer the repeat feature (at least the 614 that I owned for all of 15 minutes). If you were to purchase one of the dlink ap only (with out the routing functions) MAYBE they have this feature to act as a repeater. Linksys I know offers this feature but you can't mix brands while in repeater mode. Cheers.

So are you my understudy !?! :D methinks that's very confus-ing, but of course I would ;)

Its a bit like the difference between a hub & a switch, a wifi-ap might be considered a hub (not withstanding the fact that they are mostly routers but that's routing outside your network not in it - you can't route a broadcast signal like radio, its broadcast because of the media its transmitted in which is air), add in a repeater & we now have switches instead of hubs as both the AP & repeater are required to make intelligent decisions about where traffic gets routed from & to .. (each ap needs to 'realise' what clients it has hold of 'best' & make sure the 'right' ap is doing the error control & re-transmission of dropped/lost packets - & that's why Gollo says very correctly that the same brand is important, as, as far as I know, the only methods for this are 'proprietry')

So the bit 'anything special' needs the answer 'repeater' capable access points of the same brand (so both or you may cause yourself intereferance problems) ... alternatively go track yourself down a better antanae ! (but I take it 'here' this is what've got 'laid about' & hence how the question is phrased ? ..)

[Gollo]

So are you my understudy !?! :D methinks that's very confus-ing, but of course I would ;)

Its a bit like the difference between a hub & a switch, a wifi-ap might be considered a hub (not withstanding the fact that they are mostly routers but that's routing outside your network not in it - you can't route a broadcast signal like radio, its broadcast because of the media its transmitted in which is air), add in a repeater & we now have switches instead of hubs as both the AP & repeater are required to make intelligent decisions about where traffic gets routed from & to .. (each ap needs to 'realise' what clients it has hold of 'best' & make sure the 'right' ap is doing the error control & re-transmission of dropped/lost packets - & that's why Gollo says very correctly that the same brand is important, as, as far as I know, the only methods for this are 'proprietry')

So the bit 'anything special' needs the answer 'repeater' capable access points of the same brand (so both or you may cause yourself intereferance problems) ... alternatively go track yourself down a better antanae ! (but I take it 'here' this is what've got 'laid about' & hence how the question is phrased ? ..)
:confused: <=====;confused;


:D

You did a fine job of unconfusing me. I posted that one late and new I was rambling.

[confus-ed]

:D

You did a fine job of unconfusing me. I posted that one late and new I was rambling.

The acid test will be whether Dvader (http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/starwars.gif - he's the one on the left ! :D) will be able to make sense of it ;) (Gollo I know 'knows' about such things ;) so his 'understanding' doesn't surprise me) ... coneptually I think its pretty tricky to get clear in your mind ..

The key factor, is to understand that both ap & repeater may be 'aware' of the same client, so which one does the flow control ? Most 'proprietry methods' use the signal strength indicator, then 'whichever' access point deals with it (the one with the 'best' signal - which you can see if you look at your wireless control appliances), but only when you have repeaters & access points that can be 'aware' of the other - this is very new technology, no doubt we'll get some standard method soon ( & a windows process to complain about/go wrong :D), but as far as I know now, its a matter of having the 'right stuff' available to do it & nothing else .. unless of course someone knows better ...

[Gollo]

The acid test will be whether Dvader (http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/starwars.gif - he's the one on the left ! :D) will be able to make sense of it ;) (Gollo I know 'knows' about such things ;) so his 'understanding' doesn't surprise me) ... coneptually I think its pretty tricky to get clear in your mind ..

The key factor, is to understand that both ap & repeater may be 'aware' of the same client, so which one does the flow control ? Most 'proprietry methods' use the signal strength indicator, then 'whichever' access point deals with it (the one with the 'best' signal - which you can see if you look at your wireless control appliances), but only when you have repeaters & access points that can be 'aware' of the other - this is very new technology, no doubt we'll get some standard method soon ( & a windows process to complain about/go wrong :D), but as far as I know now, its a matter of having the 'right stuff' available to do it & nothing else .. unless of course someone knows better ...


Ok now I think your confus-ed (duh!!) :D Your mixing the roaming capabilities of 802.11x and the repeater functions of certain wireless access points. You are correct in that you need same brands to be able to get the repeater to work but flawed in the line that it uses signal for flow control. The way you set it up is that one ap is a pure ap. Runs like normal. The second ap just grabs the signal from the one ap and rebroadcasts it (highly inefficiant). It has nothing to do with signal (other than that it needs signal to rebroadcast ;) ). I do think that the linksys wet11 does repeat MOST 802.11b traffic (not brand specific) but I dont' know firsthand.

Or maybe I'm confus-ed? :D

[confus-ed]

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh ! I just confus-ed myself ! .. what you said is all very well, but without the ap & repeater 'singing off the same hymn sheet' as far as dropped packets goes what happens when both can see the same client ? which lot of packet drops does it 'believe' ? As the client says 'I didn't quite get all of that, can you send me this bit & that bit etc again please' are you telling me it broadcasts one lot for the bits the ap didn't send/receive sucessfully & another lot for the repeater ?

& that's why I think that the ap & repeater talk to each other - 'are aware' - hence why you need the same brand etc because without this we are gonna have some fun with flow control ..

[Gollo]

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh ! I just confus-ed myself ! .. what you said is all very well, but without the ap & repeater 'singing off the same hymn sheet' as far as dropped packets goes what happens when both can see the same client ? which lot of packet drops does it 'believe' ? As the client says 'I didn't quite get all of that, can you send me this bit & that bit etc again please' are you telling me it broadcasts one lot for the bits the ap didn't send/receive sucessfully & another lot for the repeater ?

& that's why I think that the ap & repeater talk to each other - 'are aware' - hence why you need the same brand etc because without this we are gonna have some fun with flow control ..


AHHH ok yeah what THAT is is the built in feature in 802.11x of roaming. It does use that as well I was talking purely about the repeating function not the roaming.

[DVader]

Hmmmm...... sounds like it won't work. I was thinking on the same lines as both of you for potential flow and caveats.

I'm haveing a issue with a XP Home computer where wireless packets are never received. Tried two USB wi-fi NICs(Belkin and D-Link) both connect and can send, but never receive. I tried both NICs on other computers and they work fine so it is the computer. XP Home doesn't have SP1 on it ether so I'm hoping that will fix it once installed. If not, I was hoping the Wireless access point to Access Point would work. Internal PCI Wireless is not an option, All PCI slots are filled.

[Gollo]

Do you have any firewall software installed or the windows xp firewall enabled? If so this could be your problem. Also you might try changing the channel on the ap as there might be interferance on that channel and it the computer is more suseptable than the access point. Also is wep enabled on the access point and are you getting an ip address from the access point? You might also see if there is an update to the drivers as well. Are you using the windows xp wireless config or the one provided with the nic?

[DVader]

To answer your questions. The firewall is turned off on the XP Home computer and is not getting an IP address from the Access point. Wep is enabled on the Accesspoint and four other devices(mixed brands of wireless NICs) can connect and get and IP address and access the network(even in the same room as the XP Home computer). I'm having to use the Windows Wireless control because none of the NIC utilities that come with the drivers will even start(double click, nothing happens or loads).

I really think at this point it is the XP Home computer/OS and not the access points and NICs. I'm also considering completely redoing the computer as well. There is a possiblity that it is the USB ports on the computer, it is a four year old Emachines eTower 333.

Since the computer has a wired NIC in it I thought that pluging it onto the older router/accesspoint might make it possible to use wireless that way instead of USB wireless.

[edball]

I have a wireless D-link DL-624 Router setup as the main router and wireless access point. If I setup an older DL-614+ router Access point will they communicate with each other over the wireless. I will have a computer WIRED to the switch portion of the DL-614+ will it be able to see the DL-624 and the computers and wan attached to it?

ie

Computer wired To DL-614+ -------Wirerless To-------> DL-624

Anything special needed to set this up? Basically I want to use the DL-614+ like a Wireless NIC.
I did basically what you want with a wireless bridge (D-Link). I plugged it into a regular NIC and it gained access to my network which is controlled by a wireless D-Link router. I think the model was a DL-810, don't get the "Air" one because it only works with the other "Air" products. It was around $78.00 U.S.

[Gollo]

To answer your questions. The firewall is turned off on the XP Home computer and is not getting an IP address from the Access point. Wep is enabled on the Accesspoint and four other devices(mixed brands of wireless NICs) can connect and get and IP address and access the network(even in the same room as the XP Home computer). I'm having to use the Windows Wireless control because none of the NIC utilities that come with the drivers will even start(double click, nothing happens or loads).

I really think at this point it is the XP Home computer/OS and not the access points and NICs. I'm also considering completely redoing the computer as well. There is a possiblity that it is the USB ports on the computer, it is a four year old Emachines eTower 333.

Since the computer has a wired NIC in it I thought that pluging it onto the older router/accesspoint might make it possible to use wireless that way instead of USB wireless.
Ok then your problem is in the configuration then if it's not getting an ip. Try this:

disable wep on the access point and then reset the connection on the computer (disabling wep) and see if it get's an ip. If it does then I'm like 99.9999999999999999999% sure your internet will work too. Then try re-enabling wep and re-inputing the wep key on the system. It sounds like it's not associating properly to the access point.

[DVader]

I already tried that. Disabled WEP on Access Point. Still no dice or an IP address on the XP Home computer.

[NooNoo]

Mac filtering?

[confus-ed]

Mac filtering?
Well maybe .. but you have to turn that on generally since how the hell would your wireless router know what macs are 'allowed', surley he'd know that he'd done that...

I got all confus-ed there for a moment & wondered why the hell we were talking about this ... I see we are now answering this 'supplementary' question ..

I'm haveing a issue with a XP Home computer where wireless packets are never received. Tried two USB wi-fi NICs(Belkin and D-Link) both connect and can send, but never receive. I tried both NICs on other computers and they work fine so it is the computer. XP Home doesn't have SP1 on it ether so I'm hoping that will fix it once installed. If not, I was hoping the Wireless access point to Access Point would work. Internal PCI Wireless is not an option, All PCI slots are filled.

Now of course I'm confus-ed by that .. :rolleyes:

If they 'connect' then they must receive ! .. so you'd better go over the symptoms again ..
..I'm having to use the Windows Wireless control because none of the NIC utilities that come with the drivers will even start(double click, nothing happens or loads).
Though is much more 'illuminating' & that says pretty clearly to me that the NIC isn't being seen by the xp pc correctly & that's where the problem is ...

[DVader]

Well, I decided on the network bridge. That did finally work. The SP1a install went well, but did not fix the issue with USB Wireless.