[FAQ] Using two routers together/ Extending Wi-Fi

Depends on your router - have a read of it's manual and see if it will let you turn off wi-fi. Leaving it on will cause interference with your "other" router/AP's if they are using the same or similar radio channels.
 
Hey guys, hope someone here can help me.

I have an O2 wireless box in my living room and an access point in my room connected via home plugs to the router. I'm currently running two wifi networks in my house. This has now become a bit annoying as often my phone/tablet will stay connected to one signal even if my other network has a stronger signal. I want to just have one network.

Apparently I can use my access point as a repeater (link to my ap below), but it only picks up the wifi signal of my router, it seems to ignore the fact it's connect via Ethernet (home plugs). I tried using it as a repeater but I had quite a few problems with my net connection so reverted back. Everything I find on google talks about a wireless repeater.

I do think the instructions above may fix my problem but I am a bit of a noob, so much that I'm not even sure how to change ip addresses!

Edimax EW-7228APN 150Mbps Wireless 802.11 b/g/n Range Extender/Access Point with 5-Port switch:Amazon:Computers & Accessories
 
— As an Amazon Associate, AVForums earns from qualifying purchases —
Don't bother using your AP as a "repeater" - it's not necessary (in your case.)

You're correct that "repeaters" ignore the ethernet link: That's their purpose, to "repeat" any radio transmissions they hear. One consequence of repeating is that it halves your wifi bandwidth as everything has to be transmitted twice - once for the original transmission and once for the "repeat" (hence the name) and these transmission cannot occur at the same time.

If you want to avail seamless "roaming" (as it's known) between the multiple AP's that have a cabled backhaul between them, all you have to do is ensure the wi-fi settings (SSID, security type, passphrase, etc.) are the same in all AP's. (Incidently, this is the best way to "do" wi-fi - "repeating" should only be used if you have no other choice and cannot establish cabled backhaul IMHO.)

Basically all the wi-fi settings need to be identical except the radio channel. It's best to use different radio channels so that the transmissions in each hotspot don't interfere with each other. For B/G one would choose them from the set 1,6,11.

If you want B/G/N with the fancy-smancy high bandwidth 40MHz (AKA "channel-bonded") high throughput tricks the N has available, you cannot find two non-overlapping radio channels in the 2.4GHz band, so just choose radio channels as far apart as you can get.

Note that it's the client devices that decide whether/when to roam, not the AP's. Some devices will doggedly hang on to a working link, even though there's a better one available. Some will constantly hunt for the something better. Some have a form of "roaming agressiveness" control, possibly in the NIC drivers.
 
Last edited:
Cheers mate, this has been working perfectly for the last 24 hours!
 
Thanks for the info, ive read it and im left totally confused being a bit of a techno div

My set up is basically as someone described above, I work out of a renovated part of a derelict house attached to my own house. I have a 30 metre approx lead connecting my PC to the home router, its fine for internet but wifi is just out of range.

Is there any simpler way of doing this by purchasing some hardware, or does any solution involve changing IP addresses and that sort of thing?

Thanks
 
Last edited:
I finally managed to get 30m of cable from the office to my house. I then connected an old wireless router and to my absolute amazement it work straight off.
Basically I have connected a cat6 cable from the last free port of my Fritzbox(office) and plugged it in to an old linksy wireless router(house) My Phone, notebook and iPad all connected without even being asked! As I always felt this type of thing was beyond me, I was not looking forward to setting it up, thank god i didn't have to.:clap:

However, while everything is working great, i don't believe the new linksy network(secondary) has a password, I have tried to get to the admin screen but nothing seems to work. How can i secure the network before half the village starts using it?
 
You could do worse than work through the intructions in post #1.

if you've "just plugged things in and it worked" you could be suffering from all sorts of IP addressing conflicts, firewall in the wrong place and DHCP issues which could bite you in the future (for example "device X was working yesterday, but today there's no Internet connection.")
 
Last edited:
I ended up getting a wifi extender on amazon for about £30

Im not sure how good it would be for gaming or heavy use but to just add wifi for my iPhone in my office it's worked a treat so far.
 
why not connect router two wan port to router one lan port and turns off dhcp on router two, no need to manually assign IP to router two as dhcp server on router one will do that automatically..

I have this setup

modem -(wan) time capsule (lan) - (wan) airport xtreme (lan) - wifi access point

dhcp turned off on airport xtreme (bridged mode)

all three wifi networks use different ssid, although don't see why they could not use same one
 
I don't know the details of the equipment. The "usual" reasons for not doing what you've suggested are...

A routers job is to "route" between distinct networks. It effectively "joins" networks together.

Connecting as you've suggested creates two LAN's in your infrastructure (incidently, two separate IP subnets (address) ranges would be required.)

Routing is a computationally more complex process than "switching" so traffic between devices on each LAN will be a bit slower routed than switched.

Thence, SOHO routers usually implement a firewall/NAT between their WAN and LAN ports. So devices on your "time capsule" LAN wouldn't be able to "see" devices in the "airport" LAN. Also there would be a routing issue in the time capsule as it would need something called a "static route" to find the airport LAN. (Some SOHO routers won't let you define static routes.)

Thence, with the same SSID you'd have problems when roaming as your clients would have to grab a new IP address every time they roamed, which is a bit ugly and time consuming.

As I say, I don't know your kit, but I'd suspect that setting the airport in to "bridged" mode has effectively turned off all the routing, firewall, NAT, etc. etc. and turned the "WAN" port into another "LAN" port essentially making it into a 4 port switch and Wifi combi, which is what we advocate above.

It should be easy enough to tell: If you examine the IP address, subnet mask and default gateway of some devices connected to both your time capsule and airport networks, we can tell whether they are participating in a single LAN or separate ones.
 
Last edited:
Devices on time capsule can see devices in airport and vice versa, i prefer two seperate networks, 5ghz on time capsule, 2.4ghz on airport, I don't roam
 
I was looking at 10GBASE-T, i.e using twisted pair copper cable with rj-45 connectors not the fibre stuff
 
Devices on time capsule can see devices in airport and vice versa, i prefer two seperate networks, 5ghz on time capsule, 2.4ghz on airport, I don't roam

No bad thing.

However, in LAN/IP terms, you don't have "separate networks" (IP subnets,) if everything is participating in the same IP network, (which rather supports my "guess" that you've turned the airport "WAN" port into a "LAN" port by setting airport into "bridged" mode - it sounds like you've basically turned off all the NAT/routing/firewall functions in the airport.)

Using both 2.4GHz and 5GHz hasn't created "separated" networks any more than having multiple devices each using their own ethernet cables has "separated" the devices into multiple "networks." Everything is still all in one big LAN, albeit with distinct (separate) layer 1/2 "collision domains" as it's know in the jargon (one @ 2.4 GHz and one at 5GHz.)

Dual band/dual radio wifi AP's (or routers) achieve the same thing using one box instead of the two you are using.
 
Last edited:
Hey guys, hope someone here can help me.

I have an O2 wireless box in my living room and an access point in my room connected via home plugs to the router. I'm currently running two wifi networks in my house. This has now become a bit annoying as often my phone/tablet will stay connected to one signal even if my other network has a stronger signal. I want to just have one network.

Apparently I can use my access point as a repeater (link to my ap below), but it only picks up the wifi signal of my router, it seems to ignore the fact it's connect via Ethernet (home plugs). I tried using it as a repeater but I had quite a few problems with my net connection so reverted back. Everything I find on google talks about a wireless repeater.

I do think the instructions above may fix my problem but I am a bit of a noob, so much that I'm not even sure how to change ip addresses!

Edimax EW-7228APN 150Mbps Wireless 802.11 b/g/n Range Extender/Access Point with 5-Port switch:Amazon:Computers & Accessories



Hey guys hopefully you wise folk can help me once more.

I changed from O2 to BT infinity today and my seamless roaming doesn't work anymore. My second "router" is an edimax access point which I had duplicating the exact same details of my O2 box.

I've tried doing this with the bt home hub but it just doesn't work. I've changed what I believe to be the relevant settings. However when I go from my bedroom (edimax) to the living room (homehub) my connection just drops on my iPhone/iPad. I can see the homehub but I get told that I am unable to connect? The gateway is the same on the O2 box and homehub (192.168.1.258) so I'm not exactly sure what's wrong.

Appreciate any help.

Ps I'm a bit of a noob!
 
Last edited:
— As an Amazon Associate, AVForums earns from qualifying purchases —
Post up the Wifi settings of both devices (except the passphrase.) We need to see SSID, "security" setting (WPA/WPA2/WEP/etc.) "encryption" type if available (probably one of TKIP/AES/CCMP,) and wifi bands (ABGN etc.)
 
Post up the Wifi settings of both devices (except the passphrase.) We need to see SSID, "security" setting (WPA/WPA2/WEP/etc.) "encryption" type if available (probably one of TKIP/AES/CCMP,) and wifi bands (ABGN etc.)

Hi mate, cheers for your reply! Unfortunately since researching this extensively I've found it seems to be a common problem:

Re: Home Hub 3 and wireless access points plugged ... - BTCare Community Forums

Seems like I won't be able to have seamless roaming again :(
 
A nuance of wi-fi roaming that many people miss is that it is the client device that decides if/when to roam from one AP to another, not the AP's (routers.)

As long as you set up the same SSID, PSK, security type etc. etc. in both AP's, there's no reason why seamless roaming shouldn't work, but I repeat it's entirely up to the client device as to whether they roam or not.

If you can roam fro A to B then it would tend to suggest all the parameters are correct and thence there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to roam from B to A.

But some clients are finicky. An old laptop I use at work for testing, (250 plus AP's there,) will doggedly hang on to whatever AP it's in session with until it absolutely has to roam - even with the clients "roaming aggressiveness" control turned all the way up.

So I can be sat in a room "getting only 1 bar" even though I know there are dozen better "signals" available. There's nothing much I can do about that in the "the system" as the problem lies entirely in the roaming algorithm in my ratty PC.
 
Last edited:
It doesn't even go A to B unfortunately.

All this leads me to believe the BT Homehub is a bunch of crap!
 
I doubt it's a matter of crapness, it sounds more like there's some configuration different between the two. In the "N" wi-fi spec's there's a lot of "options" available and if they don't all match, it's possible your clients won't roam. Without sight of the settings you have configured in both routers, it's going to be difficult to assess.

EDIT (Apr-2013) - Subsequent to writing this post, I came to possess an HH3 and did a bit of testing and found the same problems as described here with roaming. It's covered chapter and verse in another thread, but basically, I can't roam to an HH3 with any kind of wi-fi security/encryption turned on. It's fine if you run unencrypted, but as soon as you enable WPA and/or WPA2, roaming fails. So it seems I have to eat my words and accept that there does seem to be some issue roaming to HH3's.
 
Last edited:
mickevh said:
I doubt it's a matter of crapness, it sounds more like there's some configuration different between the two. In the "N" wi-fi spec's there's a lot of "options" available and if they don't all match, it's possible your clients won't roam. Without sight of the settings you have configured in both routers, it's going to be difficult to assess.

Ok mate here goes:

Ssid HH3Uzi
WPA & WPA2 (tried just WPA too)
I believe it's TKIP
Both are set to bgn (actually my old O2 box didn't have N, maybe something there??)

Cheers
 
Mmm - doesn't seem much wrong there. If your other AP exactly matches those settings then it should work. However, here's a few suggestions.

If possible, enable both TKIP and AES/CCMP/RSN (the latter goes by different names.) TKIP was a klugde to get around "broken" WEP security using WEP hardware. Increasingly everything is moving to AES. If all your client devices support AES, I'd dump TKIP entirely (on both routers.)

Not much uses "B" wifi these days. If none of your clients need it, I'd also turn that off. (I don't think that's the cause of your problem, but it's good housekeeping.)

By way of a test, give your AP's different SSID's temporarily and check that your clients really can associate with both AP's successfully when the only difference between them is the SSID name.

Turn off "N" temporarily and test if it works in a "G" only environment. Likewise, test with "N" only. The G spec was/is more prescriptive about it's implementation and there's not much leeway for interpretation. "N" has a lot more "options" available to the implementors, so it's possible that you're client likes one AP's "N" implementation but not the other. Or it's possible the AP's are offering up variants of N so different to each other that the client won't regard them as "similar" enough to be able to flip from one to the other.

Make sure both AP's are on very different radio channels so they don't interfere with each other.

If everything talks WPA2, ditch WPA and take any incompatibilities there out of the equation.

Ultimately it may be down to some methodical slogging through all the options to find out what works and what doesn't. Sometimes IT problems are "just like that" and there's nothing for it but to roll up ones sleaves and slog though changing/testing one thing at a time until the culprit/solution is found.
 
Last edited:
Tried using only WPA2 still no joy. Even if I set up the AP to have a different SSID I still have the same issue.

I can connect to the AP or HH3 however when I then try to connect to the other one it won't let me till I forget the other network.

It's like the HH3 already sees me on the system so is not allowing me to reconnect. This happens with both my iphone and ipad (the only two wireless devices I have).
 
It's like the HH3 already sees me on the system so is not allowing me to reconnect. This happens with both my iphone and ipad (the only two wireless devices I have).

I really doubt it's that. If you think about it, BT are like to be shipping HH's by the gazillion to people who have HH and only the HH as their wi-fi AP. Why would they bother to write in some code to "monitor everything not connected to HH and don't accept connection if someone connected elsewhere tries to connect to HH." There's just no reason to write such a bit of software when so few people are going to use it, and in any case why would they want to?

Do you try setting both AP's "G" only mode and see if that made any difference...?
 
I really doubt it's that. If you think about it, BT are like to be shipping HH's by the gazillion to people who have HH and only the HH as their wi-fi AP. Why would they bother to write in some code to "monitor everything not connected to HH and don't accept connection if someone connected elsewhere tries to connect to HH." There's just no reason to write such a bit of software when so few people are going to use it, and in any case why would they want to?

Do you try setting both AP's "G" only mode and see if that made any difference...?

I'm sure they haven't done it on purpose, just think maybe it is an inherent problem. It seems to be with the Homehub3 type B, the latest model I believe. It seems to be coming a common problem on the BT forums.

Unfortunately from what I an tell the HH has no option for just G :thumbsdow
 
Last edited:
I am currently considering having two routers for my home and wondered if you think the below will work.

I am getting BT infinity installed and as the main (only) BT socket is in the hall the router is likely to be installed there too. This is fine for wifi access throughout the house (its not a big house) but I have a NAS, HTPC and xbox360 in the living room I want connected.

Can I install a seperate 'router' in the living room connecting the NAS, HTPC and xbox into it. Most of the time I would not have an ethernet cable connecting the two 'routers' and as such the living room router would be offline but this would still enable me to stream between the NAS and HTPC or phones tablets etc. I would then only connect the two routers when the HTPC needed to go online to scrap metadata for my media or I wanted to play xbox live.

I would follow the setup on the first page to configure the routers but basically keep removing the connection between the two devices! Would the assigned IP addresses still be retained when the two routers are not connected to each other? Also as DHCP would be turned off on the living room 'router' I guess I would have to set up IP addresses for anything I might want to stream to phones, tablets etc
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom