adding Wi-Fi to wired LAN

Hi all,

I have a wired LAN on which I can share files between computers, print from different computers etc. all of which can access the internet via a ICS PC and wired router. I'm happy with this and it works just fine.

I've recently added a laptop and wired this into the LAN with no problems and it does what all the others can do, however, it would be nice to be able to sit in the garden during the summer (no comments on the deluge of rain and gale force winds over the weekend please ) and do some work and still be able to print or share files as needed.

The laptop has wireless built in and I've been looking into how to add this via wireless. Most seem to say that a Wireless Access Point is the way to go and a few say that a Wireless Router can do the same thing.

I'm thinking the former but has anyone here done it? If the WAP is the proper way then can I simply plug this unit into my existing LAN switch? Any pointers on how to do this and tips/tricks etc. would be most welcome.

Finally, I'm assuming that there would be some kind of security built into WAP as there is with most wireless products?

... oh and would I be able to connect to my own internet service as I do with the PC's/laptop from my mobile phone so that I can get upgrades/apps direct to the phone using wireless?

Thanks in advance

Ron

What router have you got?

A WAP would be the standard route as you suggest. Just plug into the existing wired lan.

Security wise yes you configure the WAP with a nice complex WPA 2 security key which is then used on the laptop to enable access.

If your mobile has wireless then yes you can connect it to the wireless network.

Hello,

You will need to set a static IP address on the AP (or router) and also ensure that the current DHCP server cannot "hand out" this static address.

Ian

Looks like he has a SpeedTouch 546, so yes, I agree.

Something is puzzling me though. He is using ICS and implies a separate LAN switch. The 546 has 4 ethernet ports. And maybe he happens to have ICS enabled but it is not in use.

Edited by RobertoS (Sun 29-Apr-12 18:26:03)

I'm using a SpeedTouch 546i v6 Roberto

Glad my guessing was about right Dave Any suggestions on a particular model/make that isn't going to break the bank?

Ian, all IP address's are static, WAN facing and LAN

Depending on where it will be sited in relation to the garden, it may be just as well costwise to buy a wireless router and eliminate the need for extra kit.

Like someone else said above, why are you using ICS if the router is already able to do that job? It seems like your configuration is far more complicated than it needs to be.

In my experience using the router itself is far more flexible than the limited set of options ICS gives you.

Now if you are using the router in modem mode and THAT is why you are using ICS, then I would recommend getting a second router to take over this job.

The reason is that a standalone WAP is pretty rare these days anyway, so if you are going to buy a new WAP to get WiFi, you might as well either get a full blown ethernet/cable router and continue to use the Speedtouch for the ADSL, or get a full ADSL2+ router and replace the Speedtouch entirely. Personally if you are happy the Speedtouch is stable, I would go for the former as I personally got better performance keeping the modem and router parts of the network on separate devices rather than having an all in one device.

It might be cheaper or more convenient to replace the router with one already wireless capable? Or could there be range problems with that.

Incidentally, did you mean you are daisy-chaining some PCs using ICS? Or are they all off the router? Have you got a separate LAN switch as well?

(You'll gather I'm quite confused by your opening post. The WAP issue is easy, as has been said by the others).

Thanks for all the replies.

Okay, the router works fine and is stable so no issues there. The ICS is something I set up years ago when I decided to give internet access to all the computers (dial up connection then later ISDN at that time). At that stage the whole thing worked via an 8 port switch. Since broadband/adsl all I've had to do is change the incoming equipment ie. the router. Everything else works just fine and as they say, if it ain't broke don't fix it

To fill in any other points (wish i could see all the replies right now!) there are 2 spare ports on the router but both used on an at-hoc basis. I have spare capacity on the switch's to add a WAP unit which I want on the LAN side so I can assign it a private address to fit in with the rest of the PC's/printers etc. on the LAN.

Hoping I've covered most replies there from memory. Thanks again to all

Ron

Why are you using ICS, when you have a router? ICS is used when you only have a modem connection on 1 PC and it simulates the function of a router.

Just replace wired router by any decent wireless router and stop using ICS.

As everyone keeps saying, given you already have a physical router using the PC as an additional router is a bit silly and inefficient. Now I don't know how much power your PC uses but it's almost always better to use the router as a router and your PC as a terminal, not the other way round. However in any case it's your decision.

As for the wireless part - it's been mentioned that standalone access points are fairly rare these days, and often cost more than their router counterparts. An AP is just a router with less ports and the routing software switched off, so it's inconsequential whichever you get; just about any wireless router can be used as an access point simply by switching off the routing functions. My personal recommendation goes to the DIR-615 if you're on a budget, as it provides 300mbps wireless N for less than £10 off eBay.

In reply to a post by rt2000:

I'm thinking the former but has anyone here done it?

That's how my set up works
I'm using a Speedtouch 585v6 with the wireless turned off (this helps it run cooler), then when wireless is required I have a Netgear WG602 (plugged into the router) which can be turned on.

As others are saying it's probably cheaper to buy a wireless router and have everything combined - which is what most people do. But I like being able to simply power off my WAP to control my wireless signal (don't want young kids up all night) and it's also nice to be able to locate the wireless signal in a different location to the router.

So the answer to your question - both your options will work fine

And would Internet Connection Sharing not require two LAN ports of the PC running it as well as the PC always having to be switched on if anyone of the other devices want internet access?

I dont think the "if it isnt broke dont fix it" approach really applies here - while, techically, it isnt broke, there are lots of things that you cant do with this configuration. While this may not be an issue at the moment it is bound to be in the future.

Plug a wireless AP into your router, ditch ICS for anything that doesnt need it and "regularise" your configuration.

This may be of interest to you. I recently had to install a WAP on my home network as the router was a fairly old Draytek without wireless. I didn't want to replace the Draytek as it is a very good and reliable router. It's a fairly simple task to plug a WAP into a router port (I used a TP - LINK WAP) but you need to ensure it has a fixed IP address on your network. These are usually in the 192.168.1.*** range if you are using DHCP (automatically distributed IP addresses from the router). The WAP initially came out of the box set for DHCP so upon first plugging it in I had to find out what address is had received (either by pinging or using something like IPSCAN) then going into it's webpage and giving it a fixed IP address, e.g. 192.168.1.100. If you have only one computer on at the time, the WAP's initial DHCP address will probably be the next IP address up from the computer. The DHCP service from the router I have restricted to a range of 12.168.1.50 to cover all the household computers, 1.100 is well outside this.
Once this was set and I'd put on the WAP security I was able to connect fine.

Just for my own education, why does a WAP need a fixed IP address on the LAN? That's two of you have said it, and one that said just plug it in, which is what I would expect.

The only reason would be to allow remote management via the AP's GUI or command line. It doesn't get involved in the traffic flow to and from clients.

Thanks.

I suppose that is a good idea for ongoing configuration/maintenance of the wireless security, rather than (I assume) messing about with a direct ethernet connection to it from the PC? Though it should be possible to pick up the current IP address from the router if it wasn't fixed?

If I was in your boat I would ditch ICS completely.
Replace the current router with a wireless N modem router.

Connect everything to the new wireless router.

If a wired connection to everything is no longer possible I would go for wireless or homeplugs.

ICS just is not needed and is limited. I've used it and found it a nightmare in terms of port forwarding etc. Sounds a very complicated and confussing setup

In reply to a post by rt2000:

Thanks for all the replies.

Okay, the router works fine and is stable so no issues there. The ICS is something I set up years ago when I decided to give internet access to all the computers (dial up connection then later ISDN at that time). At that stage the whole thing worked via an 8 port switch. Since broadband/adsl all I've had to do is change the incoming equipment ie. the router. Everything else works just fine and as they say, if it ain't broke don't fix it

To fill in any other points (wish i could see all the replies right now!) there are 2 spare ports on the router but both used on an at-hoc basis. I have spare capacity on the switch's to add a WAP unit which I want on the LAN side so I can assign it a private address to fit in with the rest of the PC's/printers etc. on the LAN.

Hoping I've covered most replies there from memory. Thanks again to all

Ron

Looking at this situation I would do the following.

Replace current router with a wireless modem router such as the netgear dgn2000

Then plug the switch into an available port on the new wireless router. Plug the current ethernet things into the switch / router

Laptop = wireless.

Something like http://s7.postimage.org/i3jjd5agr/my_setup.png

No sharing via the pc etc

Edited by ukhardy07 (Mon 30-Apr-12 16:57:52)

I tend to get a sticky label and stick management IP details underneath the router.

By having your AP not on the IP network, there may be some security benefit, as in people cannot attempt to hack it through vulnerabilities if they end up on the wireless network, e.g. poor choice of security key

You've lost me there Andrew.

1.A label stuck under a router, is a good way to remember IP details of it, and security phrase. Assuming you trust people who are in your property.

2. By having the AP on an IP in the LAN's subnet, the possibility is higher, that someone who does get into the wireless network could then access said AP.

Clearer? If not I'll climb back into my javascript hole

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

I suppose that is a good idea for ongoing configuration/maintenance of the wireless security, rather than (I assume) messing about with a direct ethernet connection to it from the PC? Though it should be possible to pick up the current IP address from the router if it wasn't fixed?

Depends on the main router and how confusing its web interface can be - for example some Thomson products.

Apple Airport Express is quite a cheap way to add WiFi capabilities, although its only single stream N - and it doesn't need a fixed IP, the management tool (Windows and Mac, not Linux) finds it by the MAC address on the network.

If you want a high performance dual band N device (40mhz only at 5ghz / 20mhz at 2.4ghz) then the Airport Extreme is pretty impressive, and you can set it to WAP mode.

Again many thanks for all the responses.

I think the general trend is towards a wireless router so I will investigate that I think. I'm in dispute with myself now as to weather to take the LAN off internet access now I'm giving things further thought. In the main there is only one machine that is used online in the main anyway. So this post has at least made me think of a longer term plan and given the wireless router route ... sorry about the pun ... it is available for the laptop and the phone too should I need access.

Again, many thanks for all the replies and thoughts. Very much appreciated

Ron

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

1.A label stuck under a router, is a good way to remember IP details of it, and security phrase. Assuming you trust people who are in your property.

2. By having the AP on an IP in the LAN's subnet, the possibility is higher, that someone who does get into the wireless network could then access said AP.

Clearer? If not I'll climb back into my javascript hole

Point 1 wasn't my problem .

Point 2 still has me stuck. I don't understand how the AP has access to the modem (component), via the router (component), if it doesn't have an IP address in the subnet range of the router. So if the router is 192.168.1.254 for example, how does an AP with either no IP address or a preset IP address of say 192.168.0.100 get through?

It doesn't, think of the AP as a piece of cable or an unmanaged hub/switch - it's just putting packets from the air onto the wire. It doesn't care what's in the packets as it runs at layer 2 (IP addresses are a layer higher at layer 3).

If you want to manage / configure the AP, you need to have an IP address that's reachable - but this is only to access the AP itself, it has no effect on the wireless traffic passing through it.

Thanks . I think I get that. My ISO-layer knowledge disappeared years ago. I used to know the gist it but it wasn't necessary in my day-to-day life even then. I retain enough to see what you mean .

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

My ISO-layer knowledge disappeared years ago.

Suspect you're referring to the OSI 7-layer model? I was always taught it didn't map to TCP/IP anyway !

I have registered properly now for the forum, my previous post was anonymous concerning the fitting of a WAP because the router was a Draytek without wireless.

There is of course no particular reason why you should have a fixed address for the WAP other than the convenience of always knowing what the IP address is so you can immediately access it. You should however ensure it lies outside the DHCP range if it is fixed to avoid conflict (i.e. the router issuing an address that is already in use). Since I run several computers DHCP is a lot more convenient for my home network (I don't have to faf around with IP addresses everytime I bring in another computer to work on.)
I'm not sure why anybody would want fixed home network IP addresses when there's a perfectly good DHCP server in the router, but ... different strokes for different folks.

If the WAP has a fixed ip address it can be added to the browser favourites and accessed immediately should you want to get at it quickly, but that is purely for convenience.
I've had routers with built in wireless and found builtin or seperate makes no difference, other than of course you use up one of the ethernet ports on the router with a seperate WAP, but this isn't a bother since the Draytek has a 1 Gig ethernet port which I split in a 1 gig four port switch. But it's purely about what you require, I do this because I work on lots of computers from outside and like to get them on the network very quickly.
Anyway, hope you get it all sorted, and hope all these replies have been helful.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

My ISO-layer knowledge disappeared years ago.

Suspect you're referring to the OSI 7-layer model? I was always taught it didn't map to TCP/IP anyway !

The quote you give from my post proves the point LOL. [dodder][dodder].