Wireless Networking - Wiring

Hi,

I shall shortly be changing to a wireless home network, but have a few
questions regarding any necessary wiring. A bit about the network: it will
be three desktop PCs, all with wireless PCI network cards.

I believe I am correct in saying the following:

1. The Broadband modem (supplied by my ISP) plugs straight into the
telephone line.
2. The broadband modem then plugs into the wireless router.

However, I am not sure of what happens next.

Does the wireless router need to be plugged into the back of one of the PCs
using a network cable and network adaptor? Or, can all necessary
communication between the PC and router be done wirelessly?

Put another way, can the router be stand-alone, or does it need to be
connected (using a cable) to a "mother" PC? If this *is* the case, does it
mean my wireless network will only operate when the "mother" PC is switched
on? If so, are there any ways of getting around this?

I am intending to use the Belkin F5D7230 router and Belkin F5D7000 network
cards.

Thanks in advance, should anything (or everything) be unclear, please say so
and I will try to clarify.

Chris

"Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:sndAe.28530$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi,
>
> I shall shortly be changing to a wireless home network, but have a few
> questions regarding any necessary wiring. A bit about the network: it
> will be three desktop PCs, all with wireless PCI network cards.
>
> I believe I am correct in saying the following:
>
> 1. The Broadband modem (supplied by my ISP) plugs straight into the
> telephone line.
> 2. The broadband modem then plugs into the wireless router.
>
> However, I am not sure of what happens next.
>
> Does the wireless router need to be plugged into the back of one of the
> PCs using a network cable and network adaptor? Or, can all necessary
> communication between the PC and router be done wirelessly?
>
> Put another way, can the router be stand-alone, or does it need to be
> connected (using a cable) to a "mother" PC? If this *is* the case, does
> it mean my wireless network will only operate when the "mother" PC is
> switched on? If so, are there any ways of getting around this?
>
> I am intending to use the Belkin F5D7230 router and Belkin F5D7000 network
> cards.
>
> Thanks in advance, should anything (or everything) be unclear, please say
> so and I will try to clarify.
>
> Chris
>

just get a Broadband Wireless router..........don't bother with the modem.

router plugs into main phone socket...........comps talk to the router via
pci, usb, pmcia, or minipci wireless adapters

"Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:sndAe.28530$(E-Mail Removed):


>
> Put another way, can the router be stand-alone, or does it need to be
> connected (using a cable) to a "mother" PC? If this *is* the case,
> does it mean my wireless network will only operate when the "mother"
> PC is switched on? If so, are there any ways of getting around this?
>


Once everything is set up, you can do it all wirelessly. However, you most
likely will need to plug in upon first set up, and it's good to keep a wire
handy, and a computer close by, in case of problems.

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:40:06 +0000 (UTC), "Ted"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

Since the OP is on NTLI.NET, I'll assume it's an ADSL system and not a
cable modem system.

>just get a Broadband Wireless router..........don't bother with the modem.

I beg to differ with that recommendation. I don't like all-in-one
boxes, even if they are cheaper. The problem is flexability, ease of
upgrade, and positioning the access point (radio) antenna. I prefer
something like a hi-fi component system, where the ADSL modem, the
ethernet router, and the wireless access point, are three different
seperate boxes. The ADSL modem is just a brain dead ATM to ethernet
bridge. $15-$60 on eBay. However, if the buyer moves and goes to
some house that has a cable modem, satellite, or WISP broadband
instead of ADSL, then it's easy enough to simply replace the modem
part of the puzzle, leaving the router and wireless parts intact.
Similarly, if the need for complex router features appears (VPN
termination, intrusion detection, hot spot operation, etc), then the
router could be upgraded without affecting the the modem or the
wireless parts of the puzzle. You can get some very fancy routers,
but they're all ethernet only, with no built in wireless. Similarly,
the wireless part of the puzzle is adding new features and acronyms on
a monthly basis. If the latest wireless technology obsoletes the
access point, again it is only necessary to replace the access point,
not the entire conglomeration.

Location is another issue. Wired devices such as modems and ethernet
router tend to congregate where the wires all come together. That's
usually n a basement, closet, under a desk, on the floor, or other
well hidden location.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/pics/dri...es/mess01.html
Unfortunately, such locations are terrible for wireless conectivity.
Ideally, the access point and antenna should be as high in the room as
possible, centrally located in the desired coverage area, and away
from the metallic tangle of wires and cables found around most router
and ethernet switches. With a seperate access point, all that's
required to connect to the ethernet router is a single CAT5 cable and
possibly some AC power. This arrangement also has the supreme
security advantage of allowing the seperate access point to be turned
off when not in use. No need to leave it on if nobody is home or
using the wireless.

Therefore, may I humbly suggest you NOT purchase an all-in-one
conglomeration of modem, router, and wireless, lest you blunder into
one of the aformentioned situations.

>router plugs into main phone socket...........comps talk to the router via
>pci, usb, pmcia, or minipci wireless adapters

Yep. Wireless is bridging and knows nothing about IP addresses,
routeing, or networking. It's literally a replacement for an ethernet
cable. More specifically, 802.11 encapuslates 802.3 ethernet packets
making it essentially an ethernet extension cord.


--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558

The Chairman wrote:
> "Chris" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
> news:sndAe.28530$(E-Mail Removed):
>
>
>>
>> Put another way, can the router be stand-alone, or does it need to be
>> connected (using a cable) to a "mother" PC? If this *is* the case,
>> does it mean my wireless network will only operate when the "mother"
>> PC is switched on? If so, are there any ways of getting around this?
>>
>
>
> Once everything is set up, you can do it all wirelessly. However, you
> most likely will need to plug in upon first set up, and it's good to
> keep a wire handy, and a computer close by, in case of problems.

I just put a second linksys wrt54g wap/router device on my home system.. At
walmart this week for
$59.88.....(http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...ct_id=2470125)..
No mother pc needed, can do both wired and wireless.. Probably cheaper than
the electric to leave a pc on.
I usually set it to wired only to change configuration, then a hacker can't
mess with my settings.

>
> I beg to differ with that recommendation. I don't like all-in-one
> boxes, even if they are cheaper. The problem is flexability, ease of
> upgrade, and positioning the access point (radio) antenna. I prefer
> something like a hi-fi component system, where the ADSL modem, the
> ethernet router, and the wireless access point, are three different
> seperate boxes. The ADSL modem is just a brain dead ATM to ethernet
> bridge. $15-$60 on eBay. However, if the buyer moves and goes to
> some house that has a cable modem, satellite, or WISP broadband
> instead of ADSL, then it's easy enough to simply replace the modem
> part of the puzzle, leaving the router and wireless parts intact.
> Similarly, if the need for complex router features appears (VPN
> termination, intrusion detection, hot spot operation, etc), then the
> router could be upgraded without affecting the the modem or the
> wireless parts of the puzzle. You can get some very fancy routers,
> but they're all ethernet only, with no built in wireless. Similarly,
> the wireless part of the puzzle is adding new features and acronyms on
> a monthly basis. If the latest wireless technology obsoletes the
> access point, again it is only necessary to replace the access point,
> not the entire conglomeration.


And I thought I was to only one that still liked having individual
components

YouCanToo wrote:
>> I beg to differ with that recommendation. I don't like all-in-one
>> boxes, even if they are cheaper. The problem is flexability, ease of
>> upgrade, and positioning the access point (radio) antenna. I prefer
>> something like a hi-fi component system, where the ADSL modem, the
>> ethernet router, and the wireless access point, are three different
>> seperate boxes. The ADSL modem is just a brain dead ATM to ethernet
>> bridge. $15-$60 on eBay. However, if the buyer moves and goes to
>> some house that has a cable modem, satellite, or WISP broadband
>> instead of ADSL, then it's easy enough to simply replace the modem
>> part of the puzzle, leaving the router and wireless parts intact.
>> Similarly, if the need for complex router features appears (VPN
>> termination, intrusion detection, hot spot operation, etc), then the
>> router could be upgraded without affecting the the modem or the
>> wireless parts of the puzzle. You can get some very fancy routers,
>> but they're all ethernet only, with no built in wireless. Similarly,
>> the wireless part of the puzzle is adding new features and acronyms
>> on a monthly basis. If the latest wireless technology obsoletes the
>> access point, again it is only necessary to replace the access point,
>> not the entire conglomeration.
>
>
> And I thought I was to only one that still liked having individual
> components

Well, even though I have the wap/router in one box, all my audio-video stuff
are discrete components... I look at wap stuff as throwaway/get the
cheapest, and under $60 for a wap/router at walmart was a pretty cool price.

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 01:45:19 -0700, YouCanToo <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>And I thought I was to only one that still liked having individual
>components

Well, sometimes I suspect I'm the only one on the planet with such an
opinion. Most of what I do lately is troubleshooting installations.
I'm constantly running into problem that would best be solved by
moving, replacing, or augmenting one of the basic components of the
wireless system, but due to the all-in-one nature of the current
commodity hardware, such a change would necessitate replaceing
everything. Last week, one of the local hot spot owners wanted the
ability to turn off the wireless but keep the router on for his own
use. I ended up with a rather crude software solution, but it would
have been much easier if the wireless access point has been in a
seperate box. About a month ago, I replaced a perfectly adequate
all-in-one box with components because the owner wanted to share his 5
static IP addresses with the other businesses, but because the ADSL
modem was conglomerated with the router, he couldn't split off the
connection to other routers.

In another case, the location of the various devices necessitated
seperate boxes. The most common is insufficent RF coverage in a home
where exposed cables are a problem. The wireless wants to live up
high, but the wires to the switch make a mess. That reminded me of a
story. Gorgeous museum quality house. The owner didn't like all the
CAT5 wires climbing his wall so he bought an all-in-one conglomeration
with a built in ADSL modem. He then installed a pair of Phonex (POTS
telephone over power line) adapters to eliminate the phone line going
to the modem. That didn't work at all. I didn't replace that one
with components, but added an external antenna to get decent coverage
from where he had buried the all-in-one box. Part of the fun was
painting the coax cable to match the wall coloring.



--
Jeff Liebermann (E-Mail Removed)
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 AE6KS 831-336-2558