Using Wireless and Wired Networks Together

I have moved to a house where getting a wire from my modem/router will be
a pain so I'm thinking of going wireless. However I will want a wired
connection to my NAS and another PC. I also want to be able to use a
wireless connection from my laptop to the main PC.

Many moons ago I used 2 wired connections so that I cold benefit from a 1
Gb/s speed, if I remember correctly (and I may not be) I bridged the 2
connections.

Is this the way to do it? Should both the wired and wireless IP addresses
be in the same range?

--
Those are my principles – and if you don’t like them, well, I have others.
(Groucho Marx)

On 24/10/10 19:21, Jeff Gaines wrote:

Should both the wired and wireless IP
> addresses be in the same range?

Usually yes.


--
Bernard Peek
(E-Mail Removed)

On 25/10/2010 in message <(E-Mail Removed)> Daniel James
wrote:

>If you're doing something else you should probably tell us what?

Many thanks, Daniel - a little bit different:

Wired & wireless modem/router connected to 'phone line.
PC1 connects to modem/router via wireless.
PC1 also connects to NAS and PC2 using a wired connection.
Laptop connects to PC1 wirelessly so I can use PC1 via remote desktop
connection.

It doesn't use the wired connection to modem/router at all, but it's on
the kit.

I'm trying to visualise the laptop controlling PC1 (for news, mail,
browsing) and PC1 going to the Internet using a wireless connection
without 'clashing' with its wireless connection to the laptop. It is
making my brain hurt though!

Also trying to visualise using PC2 and needing to get something from the
Internet when it would have to go via PC1.

I'm not sure if I have made it clearer or worse now?

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
You can't tell which way the train went by looking at the tracks

On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:36:15 UTC, "Jeff Gaines"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On 25/10/2010 in message <(E-Mail Removed)> Daniel James
> wrote:
>
> >If you're doing something else you should probably tell us what?
>
> Many thanks, Daniel - a little bit different:
>
> Wired & wireless modem/router connected to 'phone line.
> PC1 connects to modem/router via wireless.
> PC1 also connects to NAS and PC2 using a wired connection.
> Laptop connects to PC1 wirelessly so I can use PC1 via remote desktop
> connection.
>
> It doesn't use the wired connection to modem/router at all, but it's on
> the kit.
>
> I'm trying to visualise the laptop controlling PC1 (for news, mail,
> browsing) and PC1 going to the Internet using a wireless connection
> without 'clashing' with its wireless connection to the laptop. It is
> making my brain hurt though!
>
> Also trying to visualise using PC2 and needing to get something from the
> Internet when it would have to go via PC1.
>
> I'm not sure if I have made it clearer or worse now?
>

Why not just have everything go wired or wifi via the router?
--
Regards
Dave Saville

On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:08:59 +0100, Daniel James <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
>> Should both the wired and wireless IP addresses be in the same range?
>
> Assuming you want the convenience of having all the boxes on the same
> subnet, yes.

What other option is possible if they all need WAN access? The gateway's
single IP address and subnet mask would prevent any other configuration.

> You can put them on different subnets if you want, just as
> you could if all the connections were wired.

But then they won't all have access to the Internet.

Tony

On 24/10/2010 19:21, Jeff Gaines wrote:
> I have moved to a house where getting a wire from my modem/router will
> be a pain so I'm thinking of going wireless. However I will want a wired
> connection to my NAS and another PC. I also want to be able to use a
> wireless connection from my laptop to the main PC.
>
> Many moons ago I used 2 wired connections so that I cold benefit from a
> 1 Gb/s speed, if I remember correctly (and I may not be) I bridged the 2
> connections.
>
> Is this the way to do it? Should both the wired and wireless IP
> addresses be in the same range?

Bridging two connections where one of the is wireless used to sometimes
be problematic - not sure if that's still true. That said, it's the
simplest solution though so worth a try. I'd suggest static IP
configuration for PC2 and the NAS (address in the same range as the
router but outside the DHCP range, same subnet mask, and router as
default gateway and DNS server). If the bridge works, everything will be
able to reach everything else, and the Internet, as long as PC1 is on.

The most sensible alternative I can see is to use a dedicated bridge.
This can be done using a pair of access points, one wired to the router
and the other wired to a switch connected to PC1, PC2 and the NAS; or a
single wireless device acting as a wireless client, again wired to a
switch. Either would remove the dependency of PC1 being on. The latter
option is preferable but I'm not sure what devices support it - best bet
is probably a wireless router with non-standard firmware.

It may be possible to use normal (non-NAT) IP routing to achieve the
same universal reachability, depending on the router (if you want
Internet access from PC2 or the NAS) and whether PC1 can be persuaded to
route between the wireless and wired networks.

Finally, it may be possible to share the wireless connection on PC1,
using NAT. This should work with any router, and PC2 and the NAS would
be able to reach the Internet, but nothing on the wireless side of PC1
would be able to reach PC2 or the NAS without configuring port
forwarding on PC1.

Alex

On 26/10/2010 in message <ia5vqp$rsi$(E-Mail Removed)> Alex
Fraser wrote:

[snipped]

Many thanks, Alex - I'm sure it was you who talked me through my original
bridged setup some years back.

I am in my new house with a plate, knife & fork, Futon and 12 gallons of
paint plus the laptop connected via BTFON so I can't experiment yet. If I
can find a way to run a cable while I'm decorating I will but it looks
problematic ATM.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.

On 27/10/2010 in message <(E-Mail Removed)> Daniel James
wrote:

>In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>Many thanks, Daniel - a little bit different:
>>
>>Wired & wireless modem/router connected to 'phone line.
>>PC1 connects to modem/router via wireless.
>>PC1 also connects to NAS and PC2 using a wired connection.
>>Laptop connects to PC1 wirelessly so I can use PC1 via remote desktop
>>connection.
>
>Why?

So I can use a Gigabit connection between PC1 and NAS - there's around 570
GB of data being backed up each night (I accept it's only changed data
that needs to be backed up).

>>I'm trying to visualise the laptop controlling PC1 (for news, mail,
>>browsing) and PC1 going to the Internet using a wireless connection
>>without 'clashing' with its wireless connection to the laptop. It is
>>making my brain hurt though!
>
>What do you mean by "controlling", here?

Remote Desktop - laptop on knees, PC1 in corner and chair not as
comfortable as settee!

>I'd be surprised if your laptop isn't connecting to PC1 via the router
>already (unless PC1 has two wireless cards). PC1 has one wireless
>connection to the router, the router then routes packets either to the
>laptop or to the internet.

It connects vis a WAP which is plugged into the network switch. I don't
use the wifi on the modem/router as it doesn't do channel 13 and my old
flat has between 4 and 8 wireless networks in 'view'.

I've at last persuaded BT that there is a 'phone line at the new place so
should have a connection by the weekend. As soon as it works I'll order BB
and start taking kit over to experiment. I may just have to find a way of
running a cable to PC1, even if I tuck it down the edge of the carpet.

--
Jeff Gaines Dorset UK
By the time you can make ends meet they move the ends

On 27 Oct 2010 11:59:04 GMT, "Jeff Gaines" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> It connects vis a WAP which is plugged into the network switch. I don't
> use the wifi on the modem/router as it doesn't do channel 13 and my old
> flat has between 4 and 8 wireless networks in 'view'.

You must set the modem/router to a UK/European profile in order to use WiFi
channel numbers above 11 because those are not permitted in North America.

Tony

On 28/10/2010 in message <(E-Mail Removed)> Daniel James
wrote:

>You do like to have a lot of hoops to jump through, don't you? <smile>

I couldn't afford an electric train set when I was younger, this is a
substitute :-)


>You haven't mentioned the network switch before. I take it this is not the
>switch that (I imagine) is built into the router?

No, it's a separate Gigabit switch.


>Maybe the house won't have so much contention for WiFi bandwidth and you
>can use a different channel there and cut out a box? (Mind you, we seem to
>have between 12 and 20 WiFi networks running at any given time near my
>flat, and I haven't noticed any problems with WiFi ... apart from my
>Android phone speaking a different dialect of DHCP from my router).

Not knocking it ATM, I've managed to pick up a BT FON connection although
£5 a day is pushing it!


>>I may just have to find a way of running a cable to PC1, even if I
>>tuck it down the edge of the carpet.
>
>Snake it across the middle of the floor and chuck a rug over it. That's
>what I do (though I should add that SWMBO is not over-impressed).

I under-impressed 2 SWMBO's so much they both divorced me!

--
Those are my principles – and if you don’t like them, well, I have others.
(Groucho Marx)