Cheapest client AP / Bridge (?) with WPA?

Hi All,

I have been running a couple of Netgear ME102's for a while with good
results, one as a straight AP and the other as a 'Wireless Client'
(single PC hanging off 20m of Cat5 cable).

I would like now like to use WPA and to do that thought I would
relocate the Belkin WiFi cable router to the site of the existing
Netger AP (making the Belkin only AP) and replacing the remote ME102
with .... ???


So, it want's to be (in order) cheap, have an ethernet interface (no
USB thanks) and operable in whatever mode (Wireless client or
bridge?) would have the best effect for the least impact on other nets
etc (and there are a few).

The ability to take an external (directional) aerial would be a bonus?

I have a friend who can get Edimax and Netgear equipment for me a
'trade' prices so do either do what I need please?

I think from my basic investigations a full blown WiFi cable router is
the same price as many of these alternative products (seems a shame /
overkill to set a router to 'Bridge mode') but if that's what I have
to do at least it could be used as a router if circumstances change
later? ;-(

All the best and thanks for your time ...

T i m (London)

On Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:09:45 GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

Hi All,

I have been running a couple of Netgear ME102's for a while with good
results, one as a straight AP and the other as a 'Wireless Client'
(single PC hanging off 20m of Cat5 cable).

I would like now like to use WPA and to do that thought I would
relocate the Belkin WiFi cable router to the site of the existing
Netger AP (making the Belkin only AP) and replacing the remote ME102
with .... ???

So, it want's to be (in order) cheap, have an ethernet interface (no
USB thanks) and operable in whatever mode (Wireless client or
bridge?) would have the best effect for the least impact on other nets
etc (and there are a few).

The ability to take an external (directional) aerial would be a bonus?

I have a friend who can get Edimax and Netgear equipment for me a
'trade' prices so do either do what I need please?

I think from my basic investigations a full blown WiFi cable router is
the same price as many of these alternative products (seems a shame /
overkill to set a router to 'Bridge mode') but if that's what I have
to do at least it could be used as a router if circumstances change
later? ;-(

All the best and thanks for your time ...

T i m (London)

I would suggest the Asus WL-300g, has lots of features and a thriving user
community. Available on Ebay for monkey food.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 07:04:14 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:


>I think from my basic investigations a full blown WiFi cable router is
>the same price as many of these alternative products (seems a shame /
>overkill to set a router to 'Bridge mode') but if that's what I have
>to do at least it could be used as a router if circumstances change
>later? ;-(
>

>I would suggest the Asus WL-300g, has lots of features and a thriving user
>community. Available on Ebay for monkey food.

Thanks for that ... though from what I can see only supports WEP?

All the best ..

T i m

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:09:45
GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I have been running a couple of Netgear ME102's for a while with good
>results, one as a straight AP and the other as a 'Wireless Client'
>(single PC hanging off 20m of Cat5 cable).
>
>I would like now like to use WPA ...

Be sure to use a long (at least 20 characters) strong (not common words) key.
Otherwise WPA can be even more of a security issue than WEP.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 09:42:45 GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 07:04:14 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) wrote:


>I think from my basic investigations a full blown WiFi cable router is
>the same price as many of these alternative products (seems a shame /
>overkill to set a router to 'Bridge mode') but if that's what I have
>to do at least it could be used as a router if circumstances change
>later? ;-(
>

>I would suggest the Asus WL-300g, has lots of features and a thriving user
>community. Available on Ebay for monkey food.

Thanks for that ... though from what I can see only supports WEP?

All the best ..

A customised WRT54G firmware provides WPA and QoS.

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 04:05:51 GMT, clueless<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>A customised WRT54G firmware provides WPA and QoS.

Ah, thanks ;-)

So it still looks like I'm going to have to get a router rather than a
bridge / gaming unit ?

All the best ..

T i m

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 18:00:13 GMT, John Navas
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
>In <(E-Mail Removed)> on Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:09:45
>GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>I have been running a couple of Netgear ME102's for a while with good
>>results, one as a straight AP and the other as a 'Wireless Client'
>>(single PC hanging off 20m of Cat5 cable).
>>
>>I would like now like to use WPA ...
>
>Be sure to use a long (at least 20 characters) strong (not common words) key.
>Otherwise WPA can be even more of a security issue than WEP.

Hi John,

So has this 'flaw' in WPA only recently been discovered? I ask because
nearly all the previous discussions I have read 'poo poo' WEP as being
'nearly useless and just a tad better than turning off DHCP or setting
a mac filter' and now it is suggested it *can* be better than WPA in
some cases?

So do I just keep my 128 bit WEP link?

All the best ..

T i m

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:35:43 GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 04:05:51 GMT, clueless<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>A customised WRT54G firmware provides WPA and QoS.

Ah, thanks ;-)

So it still looks like I'm going to have to get a router rather than a
bridge / gaming unit ?

All the best ..

T i m


Just to make sure there's no misunderstanding -

There's a customised WRT54G firmware for the Asus WL 300G that provides WPA and
QoS.
The Asus device is sold (cheap as chips) as an AP, Bridge, Repeater and Router.

I did wonder if the tinypeap application could be ported across to it and then
you'd have a Radius server as well.
Network would be as solid as a very solid thing.

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 11:03:10 GMT, Clueless<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:


>So it still looks like I'm going to have to get a router rather than a
>bridge / gaming unit ?
>

>Just to make sure there's no misunderstanding -

Thanks ;-)
>
>There's a customised WRT54G firmware for the Asus WL 300G that provides WPA and
>QoS.
>The Asus device is sold (cheap as chips) as an AP, Bridge, Repeater and Router.

Ah .. and I think *that* was the confusion (to me anyway) .. I
couldn't see the link between some software for a Linksys Router and
the Asus AP ;-)
>
>I did wonder if the tinypeap application could be ported across to it and then
>you'd have a Radius server as well.

That might not be much of a problem as I should have access to a
Radius server ;-)

>Network would be as solid as a very solid thing.

Solid! ;-)

So, I get my Asus thingy from eBay for 'monkey food' and then what ..
get this extra firmware from somewhere and flash the Asus box with it?
(sri to be slow here ..)

All the best again ..

T i m

[POSTED TO alt.internet.wireless - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <(E-Mail Removed)> on Thu, 13 Oct 2005 06:40:11
GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 18:00:13 GMT, John Navas
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>In <(E-Mail Removed)> on Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:09:45
>>GMT, T i m <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>I have been running a couple of Netgear ME102's for a while with good
>>>results, one as a straight AP and the other as a 'Wireless Client'
>>>(single PC hanging off 20m of Cat5 cable).
>>>
>>>I would like now like to use WPA ...
>>
>>Be sure to use a long (at least 20 characters) strong (not common words) key.
>>Otherwise WPA can be even more of a security issue than WEP.
>
>So has this 'flaw' in WPA only recently been discovered?

It was discovered about 2 years ago.

>I ask because
>nearly all the previous discussions I have read 'poo poo' WEP as being
>'nearly useless and just a tad better than turning off DHCP or setting
>a mac filter' and now it is suggested it *can* be better than WPA in
>some cases?

Yep. Lots of baloney on the 'net.

>So do I just keep my 128 bit WEP link?

Much better to use WPA *as recommended*, which is much more secure than WEP.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>