Two routers--wired vs wireless

Hi all,

Here's my setup. I have a D-Link 624 router in a room, to which I have a
couple of PCs connected via the wired ports. I've disabled the wireless
function in its firmware (I don't need it for now).

I also have an older D-Link 614+ in another room hooked up to a DSL modem
(supplied by Bell Sympatico).

The modem came configured to use 192.168.2.1.

The 614's default is to use 192.168.0.1 for itself. It assigns DHCP
addresses to my PCs (those with wireless capability) starting at
192.168.0.100.

Here's the problem.

The 624's default is also to use 192.168.0.1 and assign DHCP addresses
within the same range. I've modified that so the wired PCs have addresses
in the 169.254.x.x range.

The wired PCs hooked up to the 624 can see each other just fine; they all
get assigned addresses in the proper 169.254.x.x range. *One* of those PCs
also has a wireless PCI NIC. So it has a 169.254.x.x address, and also a
proper 192.168.x.x address assigned to it by the 614 router.

The problem with that PC is that whenever I try to go out on the internet,
it seems to insist on using the wired link--eventually it times out trying
to get out through the 169.254.x.x address. If I disable the wired NIC (or
just yank the cable), it immediately start going out through the proper
192.168.x.x route (obviously now the only one available to it). If I
reconnect the 624, it loses its ability to connect to the internet again.

How do I force this machine (running XP SP2) to always use the 192.168.x.x
address to go out on the internet?

I hope I've explained this right...

Did I ask something outright stupid? Surely I don't have everybody stumped?

If the former, then ignore anything I mentioned I've tried. Assume I'm a
stupid user; what would you do in this situation?

Are the two routers hooked to each other? If so, how? For a single
network like that you don't really want or need two DHCP servers...... you
can always disable the dhcp function of the router not hooked to the DSL
modem, assign it an ip in the range of the first router's subnet and and
hook it up to the DSL modem's router by plugging one of it's lan ports into
a lan port on the other one. Then any computers hooked up to the second
(624) router will get IP's from the first (614+) router, they'll be on the
same subnet and all use the first router as their main internet gateway.



"Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:TI2dnfwLcapMfobYnZ2dnUVZ_t-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Did I ask something outright stupid? Surely I don't have everybody
> stumped?
>
> If the former, then ignore anything I mentioned I've tried. Assume I'm a
> stupid user; what would you do in this situation?
>
>

> Are the two routers hooked to each other? If so, how? For a single
> network like that you don't really want or need two DHCP servers...... you
> can always disable the dhcp function of the router not hooked to the DSL
> modem, assign it an ip in the range of the first router's subnet and and
> hook it up to the DSL modem's router by plugging one of it's lan ports
> into a lan port on the other one. Then any computers hooked up to the
> second (624) router will get IP's from the first (614+) router, they'll be
> on the same subnet and all use the first router as their main internet
> gateway.

You might be onto something. Only, the routers are NOT hooked up to each
other.

The 614 is in another room, sitting there by itself and the modem. All the
PCs I intend to grant access to the internet do it wirelessly. The idea is
that those PCs should also be wired together through the 624--including
those that don't have a wireless card. Let me try to simplify:

- 614 and modem in a room; should only be accessed wirelessly by some of the
PCs
- 624 and a group of PCs in another room; should be wired through the 624 in
order to talk to each other. *Some* of those PCs also have a wireless NIC,
which they will use to reach the 614 and through it, the internet.



Actually--and I realize this would be a different setup--since every PC is
wired to the 624 and both routers are wireless devices, how would I go about
changing this setup so *every* PC (including those without a wireless NIC)
can access the internet? In the long run I might prefer to do that...

Easiest way is when your 624 has a WAN port (then it will probably support
NAT from WAN to LAN), when you connect the WAN port to a LAN port on the 614
you'll just get two different networks (each their own IP range, everything
connected to the 614 on the 192.168.0.xxx range and all devices connected to
the 624 on the 169.254.x.x range). The WAN port of the 624 will get an IP
address assigned by the 614. All PC's connected to the 624 will get and IP
address from the 624. the 624 will use NAT to arrange for the conversion
between the networks (I use this setup myself, but this is more difficult if
your are running servers on your network that need to be accessible from the
internet, open ports must be configured on both routers).

If no WAN port is available (or you are running servers) then use the
solution provided by nicklax.
First, disable the DHCP capability on the 624, so it will no longer provide
IP addresses to its connected PC's. Change the 624's own IP address to
192.168.0.2-99 (range the 614 has available for fixed IP addresses). Now
connect a LAN port on the 624 to a LAN port on the 614. The 614 will now
provide IP addresses for all PC's. The whole is configured as a single
network (all in the same range; 192.168.0.xxx).

Yet another option might be (but I'm not familiar with it) have your PC (the
one with both a NIC and wireless card) act as a bridge. All internet traffic
on the 624's network will then go through that PC, over the wireless
connection to the 614. How to configure exactly.... I'don't know, probably
you'll have to mess with the default gateways stuff etc. Maybe the microsoft
help on bridging in windows provides some clues.... (downside: that PC has
to stay on to provide internet access to the other PC's, upside: no cabling
required to connect the two routers in the different rooms). Maybe you may
even be able to set restrictions in the bridging functionality, which would
provide you with a means of configuring which of the PC's are granted access
to the internet and which ones not.

hope this helps....

Tieske

"Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Are the two routers hooked to each other? If so, how? For a single
>> network like that you don't really want or need two DHCP servers......
>> you can always disable the dhcp function of the router not hooked to the
>> DSL modem, assign it an ip in the range of the first router's subnet and
>> and hook it up to the DSL modem's router by plugging one of it's lan
>> ports into a lan port on the other one. Then any computers hooked up to
>> the second (624) router will get IP's from the first (614+) router,
>> they'll be on the same subnet and all use the first router as their main
>> internet gateway.
>
> You might be onto something. Only, the routers are NOT hooked up to each
> other.
>
> The 614 is in another room, sitting there by itself and the modem. All
> the PCs I intend to grant access to the internet do it wirelessly. The
> idea is that those PCs should also be wired together through the
> 624--including those that don't have a wireless card. Let me try to
> simplify:
>
> - 614 and modem in a room; should only be accessed wirelessly by some of
> the PCs
> - 624 and a group of PCs in another room; should be wired through the 624
> in order to talk to each other. *Some* of those PCs also have a wireless
> NIC, which they will use to reach the 614 and through it, the internet.
>
>
>
> Actually--and I realize this would be a different setup--since every PC is
> wired to the 624 and both routers are wireless devices, how would I go
> about changing this setup so *every* PC (including those without a
> wireless NIC) can access the internet? In the long run I might prefer to
> do that...
>
>

Do you want all those hard wired computers to have internet access or do you
only want certain ones to have it? Are you able to run a network line
between the two routers? With those routers, even though they are both
wireless, they can't connect to each other in the way you're thinking.
That is something called "wireless bridging" and certain routers and
certain firmwares support it. For instance, I have a router running an
open source firmware downstairs hooked to my cable modem, and another
wireless router upstairs (where I can't run wire to) that connects to the
downstairs router and provides internet to the upstairs computers.....just
as if they were physically connected to the downstairs router. That's one
way to do, but not a lot of routers are able to do that and it does take
some tweaking to get it to work correctly.

If you're only concerned about allowing internet access for the computers
that also have a wireless card in them then you play around with something
called a "metric" setting in windows. Basically the different network
connections are assigned a metric number that determines their
"priority"...... I think it's basically the connection with the lowest
metric number gets used first, and then down the line. So on the computer
that's both hardwired to the 624 and wireless connected to the 614 then it
could be that the metric assigned to the hardwired connection is lower than
the wireless one and not allowing internet traffic to get to the 614. You
could google that and see what you find because I really haven't played much
it. And I've noticed on mine that multiple connections can have a metric
number of 1, so in that case I'm not sure how it'd be handled. On that
same computer (while it's connected wirelessly and hardwired), you can bring
up a command prompt in windows (Start, Run, cmd, enter) and at the prompt
type in "route print" and that'll show you your current network routes that
your computer is using. You could post those and see if there's anything
weird going on.

"Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> You might be onto something. Only, the routers are NOT hooked up to each
> other.
>
> The 614 is in another room, sitting there by itself and the modem. All
> the PCs I intend to grant access to the internet do it wirelessly. The
> idea is that those PCs should also be wired together through the
> 624--including those that don't have a wireless card. Let me try to
> simplify:
>
> - 614 and modem in a room; should only be accessed wirelessly by some of
> the PCs
> - 624 and a group of PCs in another room; should be wired through the 624
> in order to talk to each other. *Some* of those PCs also have a wireless
> NIC, which they will use to reach the 614 and through it, the internet.
>
>
>
> Actually--and I realize this would be a different setup--since every PC is
> wired to the 624 and both routers are wireless devices, how would I go
> about changing this setup so *every* PC (including those without a
> wireless NIC) can access the internet? In the long run I might prefer to
> do that...
>
>

I don't need all the PCs to have access to the internet--only the ones that
have wireless NICs or built-in (such as my laptop). The routers aren't
wired together, and running a cable isn't an option.

I've heard about the metric idea you've mentioned; I'm almost convinced I've
seen some dialog box somewhere that lets you assign network priority.

The thing is, if there's a wired route between PCs, I'd prefer data
transfers to take place over that 100Mbps connection rather than wireless
(where given a choice). If I assign a higher priority to the wireless, I'm
speculating that all my xfers will take place at 54Mbps (or, typically,
less)...

I'll see if I can find some metric configuration...

Well, just setting a higher metric to the wireless isn't going to cause ALL
local traffic to go through that interface. If your laptop is connected
via wireless and is hardwired than the laptop will automatically route
network traffic through the appropiate interface depending on the
destination. If it's sending a file to another computer on the hardwired
network then it'll send it out the hardwired interface because it's got a
route entry telling it to go to that router for certain IP addresses. So,
it's not going to drop the speed on all your transfers, anything over the
wired connection is still going to be at 100Mbps....

"Homer J. Simpson" <root@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>I don't need all the PCs to have access to the internet--only the ones that
>have wireless NICs or built-in (such as my laptop). The routers aren't
>wired together, and running a cable isn't an option.
>
> I've heard about the metric idea you've mentioned; I'm almost convinced
> I've seen some dialog box somewhere that lets you assign network priority.
>
> The thing is, if there's a wired route between PCs, I'd prefer data
> transfers to take place over that 100Mbps connection rather than wireless
> (where given a choice). If I assign a higher priority to the wireless,
> I'm speculating that all my xfers will take place at 54Mbps (or,
> typically, less)...
>
> I'll see if I can find some metric configuration...
>
>

> Well, just setting a higher metric to the wireless isn't going to cause
> ALL local traffic to go through that interface. If your laptop is
> connected via wireless and is hardwired than the laptop will automatically
> route network traffic through the appropiate interface depending on the
> destination. If it's sending a file to another computer on the hardwired
> network then it'll send it out the hardwired interface because it's got a
> route entry telling it to go to that router for certain IP addresses.
> So, it's not going to drop the speed on all your transfers, anything over
> the wired connection is still going to be at 100Mbps....

Normally I'd agree with you, however I have a desktop with a PCI wireless
NIC, and a laptop with a wireless PCMCIA card...and both are also hardwired
to the 624 router. I've seen data transfers going through the wireless
instead of the wired connection (eg, in Task Manager's Networking tab, I
could see all traffic going through the wireless, while the wired connection
had nothing going. When I disabled the wireless device in one of the
machines, the data transfer went through the wired connection instead. This
was a simple file copy over a mapped drive. I simply connected to the share
using the standard \\machinename\sharename convention.

try changing the DHCP pool of the router using 169 addresses to something like 10.0.0.0/255.255.0.0 because right now your PC thinks that that connection goes straight to the internet, because it's not one of the "private" ip addresses. Even though that's a private network, you should probably be following the proper conventions anyway.

http://www.duxcw.com/faq/network/privip.htm