Wireless topography question

Please forgive me if this appears multiple times - this is my third
attempt to send!

Anyway, a couple weeks back in another thread I asked about adding
wireless capability to my wired LAN. I'd rather not replace my current
router because it also serves as my print server. Here is a diagram of
the network I am considering:

____________ ____________
| ________ | | ________ |
| | | | | | | |
| | OS 9.2 | | | | WinME | | ___________
| | iMac | | | | PC | | / \
| |________| | | |________| | | Printer |
|____________| |____________| |___________|
| _____________| |
| | _____________________________|
_____|__|__|____
| | ____________
| Router / Print | | ________ |
| Server Combo | . . . . | | | |
|________________| . | | WinXP | |
| | . | | HTPC | |
| | . | |________| |
__|__ | __________ |____________|
| | |___| |
| DSL | | Wireless |
|_____| | Router |
|__________|


Would such an arrangement be practical, or even possible? If so, what
kind of special considerations (such as cabling, extra hardware, or
special software settings) would I need to make?

Just so you know, the Mac doesn't share files with the PCs, or vice
versa, so you don't need to worry about that side of things.

Daniel A. Mazurowski wrote:
> Please forgive me if this appears multiple times - this is my third
> attempt to send!
>
> Anyway, a couple weeks back in another thread I asked about adding
> wireless capability to my wired LAN. I'd rather not replace my current
> router because it also serves as my print server. Here is a diagram of
> the network I am considering:
>
> ____________ ____________
> | ________ | | ________ |
> | | | | | | | |
> | | OS 9.2 | | | | WinME | | ___________
> | | iMac | | | | PC | | / \
> | |________| | | |________| | | Printer |
> |____________| |____________| |___________|
> | _____________| |
> | | _____________________________|
> _____|__|__|____
> | | ____________
> | Router / Print | | ________ |
> | Server Combo | . . . . | | | |
> |________________| . | | WinXP | |
> | | . | | HTPC | |
> | | . | |________| |
> __|__ | __________ |____________|
> | | |___| |
> | DSL | | Wireless |
> |_____| | Router |
> |__________|
>
>
> Would such an arrangement be practical, or even possible? If so, what
> kind of special considerations (such as cabling, extra hardware, or
> special software settings) would I need to make?
>
> Just so you know, the Mac doesn't share files with the PCs, or vice
> versa, so you don't need to worry about that side of things.
Your system looks similar to mine. You don't need a 'wireless router'
to add wireless capabilities to the network, but a 'wireless access
point' or AP. The AP will have an Ethernet port and an antenna. In
fact, if you have a large or odd shaped area to cover, you can have more
than one AP. Each AP will need an Ethernet cable from the router.
Within the constraints of where you can run your Ethernet cable, you
will see a large difference in coverage by the location of the AP.

On 15 Jul 2004 23:40:36 -0700, (E-Mail Removed) (Daniel A. Mazurowski)
wrote:

>Please forgive me if this appears multiple times - this is my third
>attempt to send!
>
>Anyway, a couple weeks back in another thread I asked about adding
>wireless capability to my wired LAN. I'd rather not replace my current
>router because it also serves as my print server.
[snipped]

And I believe you were advised to just add a Wireless Access Point to one of
the LAN ports on your existing router...

/daytripper

daytripper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>. ..
> On 15 Jul 2004 23:40:36 -0700, (E-Mail Removed) (Daniel A. Mazurowski)
> wrote:
>
> >Please forgive me if this appears multiple times - this is my third
> >attempt to send!
> >
> >Anyway, a couple weeks back in another thread I asked about adding
> >wireless capability to my wired LAN. I'd rather not replace my current
> >router because it also serves as my print server.
> [snipped]
>
> And I believe you were advised to just add a Wireless Access Point to one of
> the LAN ports on your existing router...
>
> /daytripper

Yes, the WAP option was pointed out, but WAPs tend to be more
expensive than the wireless routers, and I need to watch every dime.
(Just building the HTPC has pretty much depleted my family's IT budget
for the year.) So a suggestion was made about possibly using a
wireless router in conjunction with my current router to save money.
But the questions I ask about how such a configuration would be
deployed were not answered. So I thought a diagram would help people
understand what I was describing, and as a result perhaps I could get
those answers.

If a WAP is my only option, then so be it - I'll just have to wait a
few extra months before I can expand the network. But if the router
idea is feasible, I can deploy much sooner. So... is it? You seemed to
think so before, I just need to know the details to make it work.

On 16 Jul 2004 23:07:09 -0700, (E-Mail Removed) (Daniel A. Mazurowski)
wrote:

>daytripper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>. ..
>> On 15 Jul 2004 23:40:36 -0700, (E-Mail Removed) (Daniel A. Mazurowski)
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Please forgive me if this appears multiple times - this is my third
>> >attempt to send!
>> >
>> >Anyway, a couple weeks back in another thread I asked about adding
>> >wireless capability to my wired LAN. I'd rather not replace my current
>> >router because it also serves as my print server.
>> [snipped]
>>
>> And I believe you were advised to just add a Wireless Access Point to one of
>> the LAN ports on your existing router...
>>
>> /daytripper
>
>Yes, the WAP option was pointed out, but WAPs tend to be more
>expensive than the wireless routers, and I need to watch every dime.
>(Just building the HTPC has pretty much depleted my family's IT budget
>for the year.) So a suggestion was made about possibly using a
>wireless router in conjunction with my current router to save money.
>But the questions I ask about how such a configuration would be
>deployed were not answered. So I thought a diagram would help people
>understand what I was describing, and as a result perhaps I could get
>those answers.
>
>If a WAP is my only option, then so be it - I'll just have to wait a
>few extra months before I can expand the network. But if the router
>idea is feasible, I can deploy much sooner. So... is it? You seemed to
>think so before, I just need to know the details to make it work.

Yes, that would also have also been me ;-) as indeed even Wireless-G routers
are often considerably cheaper than many WAPs. But I believe my recommendation
was to simply replace your existing router with a wireless router. Is that not
practical?

I hesitate to recommend adding a *second* router to your LAN, if only because
it may not be as "slam-dunk" easy as a WAP to install and configure so that
everything works...

/daytripper

"daytripper" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> Yes, that would also have also been me ;-) as indeed even Wireless-G
routers
> are often considerably cheaper than many WAPs. But I believe my
recommendation
> was to simply replace your existing router with a wireless router. Is that
not
> practical?

I believe the OP wanted to keep their existing router because it also had
print server functionality.

> I hesitate to recommend adding a *second* router to your LAN, if only
because
> it may not be as "slam-dunk" easy as a WAP to install and configure so
that
> everything works...

Actually, I have done this before, and it is quite easy. The trick is to
bypass the routing function of the wireless router so that it acts simply as
a WAP. This is how you do it:

1. Ignore the WAN/uplink port of the wireless router. Instead, connect a
crossover ethernet cable to one of the LAN ports of the wireless router.

2. You should also disable the DHCP functionality on the wireless to be on
the safe side.


--
Disclaimer: This post is solely an individual opinion and does not speak on
behalf of any organization.

daytripper <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<(E-Mail Removed)>. ..
>

<snip>

> I hesitate to recommend adding a *second* router to your LAN, if only because
> it may not be as "slam-dunk" easy as a WAP to install and configure so that
> everything works...
>
> /daytripper

Yes, I'm beginning to agree that dumping the old router may be the way
to go. I wanted to keep it as a print server, but perhaps a stand
alone print server, plus a wireless router, would be cheaper than a
WAP? Time to do some shopping...

"Dean" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:<cdmega$m2g$(E-Mail Removed)>...
>
> > I hesitate to recommend adding a *second* router to your LAN, if only
> because
> > it may not be as "slam-dunk" easy as a WAP to install and configure so
> that
> > everything works...
>
> Actually, I have done this before, and it is quite easy. The trick is to
> bypass the routing function of the wireless router so that it acts simply as
> a WAP. This is how you do it:
>
> 1. Ignore the WAN/uplink port of the wireless router. Instead, connect a
> crossover ethernet cable to one of the LAN ports of the wireless router.
>
> 2. You should also disable the DHCP functionality on the wireless to be on
> the safe side.

And I was about to give up on this possibility. So I buy a crossover
cable, then connect it from one of the LAN ports of the old router, to
one of the LAN ports on the wireless router, right? And after that I
go into the configuration of the wireless router and turn off DHCP.

Daniel A. Mazurowski wrote:
>
> Yes, the WAP option was pointed out, but WAPs tend to be more
> expensive than the wireless routers, and I need to watch every dime.
> (Just building the HTPC has pretty much depleted my family's IT budget
> for the year.) So a suggestion was made about possibly using a
> wireless router in conjunction with my current router to save money.
> But the questions I ask about how such a configuration would be
> deployed were not answered. So I thought a diagram would help people
> understand what I was describing, and as a result perhaps I could get
> those answers.
>
> If a WAP is my only option, then so be it - I'll just have to wait a
> few extra months before I can expand the network. But if the router
> idea is feasible, I can deploy much sooner. So... is it? You seemed to
> think so before, I just need to know the details to make it work.

I'd check EBay. I've noticed a fair amount of WAPs for under $20.00
(all 802.11b).

"Daniel A. Mazurowski" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> And I was about to give up on this possibility. So I buy a crossover
> cable, then connect it from one of the LAN ports of the old router, to
> one of the LAN ports on the wireless router, right? And after that I
> go into the configuration of the wireless router and turn off DHCP.

Yup, you'll basically have a wireless hub instead of a wireless router. You
might not even have to disable the DHCP.

--
Disclaimer: This post is solely an individual opinion and does not speak on
behalf of any organization.