2 wireless routers - one as AP, to split wireless load

M

Mav451

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 23, 2004
Messages
4,742
I've been toying with this idea - just thought I'd get some feedback.
Since last year, the wireless clients in the household have doubled, from 3 to 6-7. My friend has said that consumer brand routers can't handle more than a few wireless clients at a time, so I thought maybe I'd use two:

1) DIR-655 (just bought) as the router
2) ZyXEL (existing router) - as an AP.
*Connected together by ethernet.

Connection is as follows: (Cable Modem >> DIR-655 >> ZyXEL.)

I'd like to split the wireless load between the two. E.g. tell clients 1-3 to connect to ZyXEL. Clients 4-6 connect to D-Link.

How tough is it to do this?
 
The easiest way would be to make two different SSIDs, say WiFi01 and WiFi02. Make clients 1-3 associate to WiFi01 and set clients 4-6 associate to WiFi02. That's really the only way you are going to be able to accomplish what you want with consumer grade gear. If memory serves there were some people working on some project a while back to get OpenWRT to do automatic load balancing, but I don't know if that ever got finished/working. That and I have no idea if that software would even run on your equipment. So, yeah, just make two different SSIDs. :D
 
In addition to two SSIDs you'll also want to use two different channels, likely 1 and 11.
 
Why do you have so many wireless loads and is the setup not working for you?
Click to expand...

Basically everyone's wireless: mostly laptops except for me, who's on a a desktop, but in the basement. I notice the responsiveness tends to suffer after it exceeds 2-3 users. So yeah, it was fine until 2 other people decided to go wireless, and another user added an additional laptop.

I suppose if I was lazy, I'd just stomach the 6-user time of days as "rush hour", and not do anything. OTOH, I am an [H] user, so I don't mind doing a little extra work to make sure everyone's getting a good experience on the network (including the admin of course haha).
 
If you're willing to do a little extra work, then wiring the house (or at least to some of the users) is the option to go with IMO. You can split up the wireless load like that and it will be less bad, but....
 
dandragonrage said:
If you're willing to do a little extra work, then wiring the house (or at least to some of the users) is the option to go with IMO. You can split up the wireless load like that and it will be less bad, but....
Click to expand...

Haha wiring the house is more than "a little extra work". I figure configuring an additional AP is nothing compared to that...plus this isn't exactly my house either.
 
Haha I think you're overestimating my abilities here. I have 0 experience with home improvement or the tools necessary (and as I said before, this house is not mine). I would definitely like to see how you wired your home...but I probably can't apply that until I move into my own place.
 
Took a stud finder to find the studs in my walls, then used a knife and a hammer to knock out some drywall net to it. Put a drill in and made a hole through the floor. Ran my wire through a box and through the floor (downstairs in my house has either no ceiling (joists exposed, that is) or a drop ceiling, which made it a lot easier) and to where it needed to be. Used a wall patch and joint compound on the wall. I haven't repainted anything but the walls need a lot of patching from when I was renting out the house anyway :/

Does depend on what style house you have... I have a split level house which are relatively easy.
 
HoppyChris said:
In addition to two SSIDs you'll also want to use two different channels, likely 1 and 11.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use those two, it was my understanding that once you got to the ends, they wrap around? Maybe I'm horribly wrong, but something like 1 and 7 would be better.
 
vage said:
I wouldn't use those two, it was my understanding that once you got to the ends, they wrap around? Maybe I'm horribly wrong, but something like 1 and 7 would be better.
Click to expand...

nope, using 1 and 11 would be fine. You want some channel separation. That is why wireless company's usually recommend you do 1,6,11 when hard-coding channels. With decent enterprise gear I usually let them auto-detect the least congested frequency. Home grade stuff usually doesn't do that so well, IMO. you could also do like 3,9 if you wanted to. Just try and stay as far away from 6 as you can since that is what most consumer stuff defaults to.
 
vage said:
I wouldn't use those two, it was my understanding that once you got to the ends, they wrap around? Maybe I'm horribly wrong, but something like 1 and 7 would be better.
Click to expand...

No they do not wrap around. Do you get interference from 107.9MHz FM when you listen to 87.9MHz? No.
 
If i where you, I would use DD-WRT on both routers and a 4 port switch. Even a 10/100 would be fine, especially since there is only one system on the network with a wired connection. Connect the routers to the switch, connect you to the switch, plug switch into modem, voila, load balancing with a pair of access points. If you want to secure it, run a slim virtual radius server on your system and your all set.
 
taht will only work if the modem will give him more than 1 ip which 99.99% of home setups will not do.
 
Well, many ISPs will be happy to sell you an extra IP or two for $5-10/mo per IP. Is it necessary? Probably not. I think the 655 should be able to handle the routing.
 
Yeah, but its totally not even needed for this. He'd be better off disabling DHCP on one router and using it as an AP. the problem is that he doesn't have enough bandwidth for his wireless not his ISP.

It wouldnt really be load balancing either, it would just be splitting the load.

The best best Idea is like this:

Internet->Modem-WAN port on Router 1(DHCP ON)

Lan port on router 1-> lan port on router 2(DHCP OFF)

at home I have this setup:

Modem->PFsense router->48 port switch

D-link wifi router(DHCP off)<-48 port switch->netgear wifi router(DHCP off), and the 2 are on seperate channels. My fiancee uses the netgear on her laptop. I use the d-link when im on my laptop
 
So summary:

1) Set both routers (Main and one connected via LAN port) to separate channels.
2) Connect secondary router via LAN port.
3) Turn off secondary router's DHCP.

Anything else I need to watch out for?
 
make the internal IP of the second router is something else (like 192.168.1.2 or 192.168.0.2)
but in the same subnet.

Make sure the cable connecting the two routers is plugged into a LAN port of both NOT the wan port on router #2.

My network is: 192.168.1.1 for my pfsense router and then .2 for the dlink and .3 for the netgear. I can still login to them to edit settings, so it will work just fine.
 
I guess minor question - QoS.
Should my secondary router (the AP) have Streamengine QoS on? Or should I disable it b/c my D-Link will have it on as well.

Or should I just leave my settings as is?
 
Disable it. In fact, don't even use the routing function on the secondary router. You should be linking them together via LAN ports.
 
The D-Link should be able to handle all of your clients all well and good. I've got a total of 13 devices connected to mine and experience 0 slowdown at all when they're all working. (Mind you 4 of them are connected using one wifi card.. but hey.)
Yes yes, how do I have 12 in a 4 person household?! Well.
Sister -> Laptop, Cell Phone
Mom -> Desktop, Cell phone x2 (Work/Home use)
Stepdad -> 2x Mac laptop, iPhone 3G,
Me the [H] enthusiast -> 2x laptop, 2x server, 1x workstation/desktop


Have you ever thought that the other router might be somehow limiting your bandwidth or stealing it? Is your network encrypted and/or are you living in an apartment where people could be leeching your bandwidth?

It's quite possible that it may just be you don't have enough bandwidth to support all those people. Even if you've got a N Connection @ 300mbps, your internet may be 5mb/512kb and you're maxing out the 5mb with 6 clients connected to the 'web.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top