Hub to hub, but wireless

I have 2 machines in room A, one being my main desktop; and 2 in room B,
one being my firewall, the other my web-name-dhcpserver; there's a hub in
each room: the room A hub is a satellite of the room B hub. So they're
all on the same "network"; I think I need to keep it that way, as the
firewall does NAT and port-forwarding for the other three machines.
I'd like to be wireless between the 2 hubs, as right now a wire is draped
across my entry hallway, (no attic or underfloor access for the wire).

I haven't seen any configurations in the various "guides" that address
this situation. (And I'm looking for a "least-cost" solution.) Any
suggestions?

--
Dave Brown Austin, TX


Dave Brown

Am Mon, 05 Jul 2004 16:14:10 GMT hat Dave Brown
<(E-Mail Removed)> geschrieben:

> I have 2 machines in room A, one being my main desktop; and 2 in room B,
> one being my firewall, the other my web-name-dhcpserver; there's a hub
> in
> each room: the room A hub is a satellite of the room B hub. So they're
> all on the same "network"; I think I need to keep it that way, as the
> firewall does NAT and port-forwarding for the other three machines.
> I'd like to be wireless between the 2 hubs, as right now a wire is draped
> across my entry hallway, (no attic or underfloor access for the wire).
>
> I haven't seen any configurations in the various "guides" that address
> this situation. (And I'm looking for a "least-cost" solution.) Any
> suggestions?
>

you are looking for two wireless access-points, which both act as
transparent bridge. It might be possible with the most AP's, but only use
same AP's from the same vendor. Different AP's doesn't connect or cause
lot of problems.

--
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 16:14:10 GMT, Dave Brown <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> I have 2 machines in room A, one being my main desktop; and 2 in room B,
> one being my firewall, the other my web-name-dhcpserver; there's a hub in
> each room: the room A hub is a satellite of the room B hub. So they're
> all on the same "network"; I think I need to keep it that way, as the
> firewall does NAT and port-forwarding for the other three machines.
> I'd like to be wireless between the 2 hubs, as right now a wire is draped
> across my entry hallway, (no attic or underfloor access for the wire).
>
> I haven't seen any configurations in the various "guides" that address
> this situation. (And I'm looking for a "least-cost" solution.) Any
> suggestions?

You could do it with 2 wireless cards in ad-hoc mode, but then those 2 PCs
would always need to be on. A more OS independent solution would be 2
access points in bridge mode or an AP and a wireless bridge.

This is not necessarily a brand or model recommendation, since other
brands and wireless speeds are available.

When I first got a new PC, I connected it to a 10/100 PC card on my laptop
which was wirelessly connected to WAP11 on Linux pppoe/router in basement.
Now I have a WET11 which can directly connect the new PC (or network on
hub/switch) to the WAP11.

But 2 wireless APs usually only bridge to matching units and that
deactivates their AP function. So if you may want to connect both a
remote wired network and a wireless laptop, it may be better to use a
wireless bridge for one of the units (then it connects as a client, which
can allow other client devices to connect to AP)

In some cases internal devices may be more cost effective, but external
devices are more flexible and less OS dependent.

--
David Efflandt - All spam ignored http://www.de-srv.com/

"Dave Brown" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> I have 2 machines in room A, one being my main desktop; and 2 in room B,
> one being my firewall, the other my web-name-dhcpserver; there's a hub in
> each room: the room A hub is a satellite of the room B hub. So they're
> all on the same "network"; I think I need to keep it that way, as the
> firewall does NAT and port-forwarding for the other three machines.
> I'd like to be wireless between the 2 hubs, as right now a wire is draped
> across my entry hallway, (no attic or underfloor access for the wire).
>
> I haven't seen any configurations in the various "guides" that address
> this situation. (And I'm looking for a "least-cost" solution.) Any
> suggestions?
>
> --
> Dave Brown Austin, TX

Dave,

Been there, done that. Used two Linksys access points.
Put them in Bridged mode, and away you go. You might
need a crossover cable between the AP and the hub. It
depends on your hub. I used Hawking 8 port switches and
they are clever enough to reconfig the ports to match the
wiring, automatically :-)

I found that if one has MAC filtering turned on, then you
need to pollinate both AP filters with each others MAC
addresses. Also, I found that disabling the broadcast of
the SSID would kill the bridge.

Enjoy,
Mangled&Munged.

On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 23:18:20 +0000, David Efflandt wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Jul 2004 16:14:10 GMT, Dave Brown <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> I have 2 machines in room A... and 2 in room B...
>> ...I'd like to be wireless between the 2 hubs, as right now a
>> wire is draped across my entry hallway...

Likewise, and I'm reluctant to start drilling.

>> I haven't seen any configurations in the various "guides" that address
>> this situation. (And I'm looking for a "least-cost" solution.) Any
>> suggestions?
>
> You could do it with 2 wireless cards in ad-hoc mode, but then those 2
> PCs would always need to be on. A more OS independent solution would be
> 2 access points in bridge mode or an AP and a wireless bridge.

That's great! I did some (half assed) research and concluded that the
wireless hubs could not do it. The reason I was thinking of using hubs was
because my machines have TP ethernet connections and APs (available
around here) seem to want to be USB connected (not available on all my
machines). I thought an AP was basically a 1 connector wireless hub. I
didn't know about the "bridge" mode, despite that functionality (or lack
thereof, viz. hubs) being mentioned in various web pages. Mostly, when
I dug down deep enough, they said that wireless hubs could not do
bridging. Something to do with addresses. So I gave up... (too easily?)

That gives me a hint. I'll have to go back to my research...

BTW, if you want to use an AP and a wireless hub, how do you wire up the
AP? In "bridge mode"? Can you then connect it to another (non-wireless)
hub (in the 2nd room)? As you say, one doesn't want to dedicate a computer
as a permanently powered router. Can you connect an "uplink" connector on
a (non-wireless) hub to an AP? I haven't seen that done anywhere. I
suppose it makes sense, though: an "uplink" is just like a computer?

> This is not necessarily a brand or model recommendation, since other
> brands and wireless speeds are available.
>
> When I first got a new PC, I connected it to a 10/100 PC card on my
> laptop which was wirelessly connected to WAP11 on Linux pppoe/router in
> basement. Now I have a WET11 which can directly connect the new PC (or
> network on hub/switch) to the WAP11.
>
> But 2 wireless APs usually only bridge to matching units and that
> deactivates their AP function. So if you may want to connect both a
> remote wired network and a wireless laptop, it may be better to use a
> wireless bridge for one of the units (then it connects as a client,
> which can allow other client devices to connect to AP)

er, you're losing me... I'd like a wireless hub (with my cable-modem
connection) so that I can also use a wireless PC(s), and also a "bridging"
AP for a second small network of computers in the basement. Is that
confounded by that "deactivation" that you talk about? Documentation?

I'll have to dig up docs on WAP11 and WET11, etc. I like Linksys.

For future reference, can you bridge more than 2 connections? Can you
setup several "bridging" APs? or is it only 1 to 1. I must confess I don't
know what happens in there. NAT should not be necessary on bridges, right?
That is only required on the cable-modem connection, where you're making
your entire private network look like (spoof) a single computer connection.

--
Juhan Leemet
Logicognosis, Inc.