We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Multiple wireless access points
verybigchris
Posts: 630 Forumite
in Techie Stuff
My workplace has wired networking, but a couple of years ago we needed some wireless coverage, so I dusted off three old wireless routers and set them up as access points, each with their own SSID and password.
Originally I wanted the seperate wifi zones, but that's not the case anymore. Am I right in thinking that if I now change them all to have the same SSID and password then devices will be able to connect seamlessly as they move around the building, or is there more to it than that?
Originally I wanted the seperate wifi zones, but that's not the case anymore. Am I right in thinking that if I now change them all to have the same SSID and password then devices will be able to connect seamlessly as they move around the building, or is there more to it than that?
0
Comments
-
It may or may not work, you may need to consider how the DHCP is managed, and it may not be an automatic and elegant handover.
If there's a modest budget available, look at cloudtrax who offer a mesh solution, self organising, you plumb some AP's into Ethernet, some just act as repeaters/range extenders. You get upto 4SSID's and you can throttle certain SSID's so guests get slow without trashing your bandwidth, preventing guests from printing, etc. You also get vouchers facilities out of the box, and simple PayPal integration so you can sell connectivity if you choose, or at least limit guest access to 1hour connections so they don't leech forever. Under £100 per AP, support for PoE or simple adapter. Try joining cloudtrax.com and looking at the configuration options, good system0 -
The rule for multiple WAPs to enable "seamless handover" is: same SSID and password, different channels.
If you're using the 2.4 GHz band, use channels 1, 6 and 11.0 -
The rule for multiple WAPs to enable "seamless handover" is: same SSID and password, different channels.
If you're using the 2.4 GHz band, use channels 1, 6 and 11.
IIRC, when I tried with consumer-grade routers, I found you needed exactly the same encryption too. I had one old router that only supported WPA, and a newer one that supported WPA2, but not the original WPA. So devices didn't switch between them automatically.0 -
You are undoubtedly right - I assumed that all devices would always use WPA2, everywhere!0
-
All answers above are wrong.
A router has to have an AP mode to do this, so if two have AP mode you can make them slaves to the 3rd which is the master.
You then add the details of the main router and it effectively becomes a slave; It passes DHCP requests it receives to the master, so it is effectively ONE network.
If you had the three and did not use AP mode you would have three different networks that happen to have the same SSID, but they would be THREE networks. You would not be able to see the other devices on the two other networks.
If you had three routers from the same company and they had some sort of automatic switching to AP mode then it might work. Either way network infrastructure requires planning. There can be good reasons to keep things separate, e.g. the Wifi for clients, you would not want them sniffing about your private network.Thanks, don't you just hate people with sigs !0 -
All answers above are wrong.
A router has to have an AP mode to do this, so if two have AP mode you can make them slaves to the 3rd which is the master.
You then add the details of the main router and it effectively becomes a slave; It passes DHCP requests it receives to the master, so it is effectively ONE network.
If you had the three and did not use AP mode you would have three different networks that happen to have the same SSID, but they would be THREE networks. You would not be able to see the other devices on the two other networks.
If you had three routers from the same company and they had some sort of automatic switching to AP mode then it might work. Either way network infrastructure requires planning. There can be good reasons to keep things separate, e.g. the Wifi for clients, you would not want them sniffing about your private network.
No -- you don't need any special AP mode (as far as I know). You just use the additional routers as wired hubs/switches and wireless access points.
Obviously nothing is going to work if you use more than one as a DHCP server.0 -
-
No -- you don't need any special AP mode (as far as I know). You just use the additional routers as wired hubs/switches and wireless access points.
Obviously nothing is going to work if you use more than one as a DHCP server.
"As far as you know" being the operative words!!
Previous comments in this thread suggest that by simply having the same SSID and Password and different channels.
The fact is it is going to depend on manufacturer but usually without proper configuration there is conflict.
These devices all come configured with a DCHP server and most use the same subnet, 192.168.1.x but even if they use a differenr one, without configuration there can be no ROUTING because the devices would be unaware of each other. In plain terms it means devices on one network will not see those on another, will not be able to share files or print on the Lan.
That is why you have a MASTER, so it manages the DHCP in one place and responds to requests from the SLAVE access points.
Without such configuration they are three seperate networks all configured to send traffic upstream to the web, they would be unaware of each other and could not route packets because there would be a conflict of IP address.
Oh it would be a wonderful world if as you suggest " You just use the additional routers as wired hubs/switches and wireless access points." The reality is that you have to configure and design the network, decide what traffic you will allow to be routed and avoid conflict.
Having worked on the biggest intranet in Europe with thousands of subnets, VPN's and hundreds of thousands of devices I can tell you it needs to be thought through. Even if you have a small requirement to begin with.
Sure you can plug some kit in and it might work, at least for a while, IF there are no conflicts; but it will go wrong in due course. There are also security implications.Thanks, don't you just hate people with sigs !0 -
I bow to your superior [STRIKE]knowledge[/STRIKE] ignorance! :rotfl:
The OP wishes that "devices will be able to connect seamlessly [to the internet] as they move around the building".
Esuhl and I have provided an answer, pleasingly arrogance-free...
A wrong answer is no answer at all.
I am not going ro have a peeesing contest with you, just say RTFM or in the case the RFC's!!Thanks, don't you just hate people with sigs !0 -
"As far as you know" being the operative words!!
Previous comments in this thread suggest that by simply having the same SSID and Password and different channels.
The fact is it is going to depend on manufacturer but usually without proper configuration there is conflict.
These devices all come configured with a DCHP server and most use the same subnet, 192.168.1.x but even if they use a differenr one, without configuration there can be no ROUTING because the devices would be unaware of each other. In plain terms it means devices on one network will not see those on another, will not be able to share files or print on the Lan.
That is why you have a MASTER, so it manages the DHCP in one place and responds to requests from the SLAVE access points.
Without such configuration they are three seperate networks all configured to send traffic upstream to the web, they would be unaware of each other and could not route packets because there would be a conflict of IP address.
Oh it would be a wonderful world if as you suggest " You just use the additional routers as wired hubs/switches and wireless access points." The reality is that you have to configure and design the network, decide what traffic you will allow to be routed and avoid conflict.
Having worked on the biggest intranet in Europe with thousands of subnets, VPN's and hundreds of thousands of devices I can tell you it needs to be thought through. Even if you have a small requirement to begin with.
Sure you can plug some kit in and it might work, at least for a while, IF there are no conflicts; but it will go wrong in due course. There are also security implications.
You don't seem to understand how consumer-level routers work.
You're not using the actual router (that routes between networks) on any more than one device. The secondary and subsequent "routers" simply have their built-in multi-port switches connected together via Ethernet.
All you need to do is give the routers a valid IP address (all on the same subnet) and ensure that only one is providing DHCP.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455K Spending & Discounts
- 246.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178K Life & Family
- 260.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards