I have just obtained a Sonicwall TZ-150 wireless appliance and a
Netgear EVA700 media player. The latter is a box that takes input from
an RJ-45 cable or 802.11g radio waves, and outputs audio and video
(analog) to a TV.
These two devices are not playing nice. Perhaps this is a common theme
in the world of 802.11g?
I am thinking that I might have to try placing a wireless bridge
between the two devices. What I mean is that I would continue to use
the TZ-150 as a wireless router/firewall/access point. I would attach
a simple bridge to the EVA700 via RJ-45 cable. The bridge would "talk" to
the TZ-150 via radio and relay to the RJ-45 cable, out to the EVA700.
Another midnight engineering project.
My problem is that I can't find a decent bridge. I want WPA, and I
want reasonable bandwidth, in order to support streaming MPEG
bitstreams at HDTV bitrates. 15 Mbit/s. would be nice.
The Linksys WET54G would be ideal, except that it might be a piece of
shit. I have looked at the user reviews at Amazon.com and I am not
encouraged.
Am I going to have to deploy a full service wireless AP and configure
it to be a simple bridge? Or is there a nice, compact bridge that
doesn't suck?
Thanks for any suggestions.
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
>My problem is that I can't find a decent bridge. I want WPA, and I
>want reasonable bandwidth, in order to support streaming MPEG
>bitstreams at HDTV bitrates. 15 Mbit/s. would be nice.
(...)
>Am I going to have to deploy a full service wireless AP and configure
>it to be a simple bridge? Or is there a nice, compact bridge that
>doesn't suck?
You might as well use a WRT54G or Buffalo router with DD-WRT in the
client mode. That's because a dedicated bridge, game adapter,
ethernet bridge, client radio, or whatever it's called this week, is
possibly more expensive than the router. For example, the Buffalo
WHR-HP-54G router is about $60 while the corresponding ethernet bridge
WLI-TX4-G54HP is about the same price:
<http://www.buffalotech.com/products/product-detail.php?productid=118&categoryid=29>
Might as well get the added features of the router.
David Arnstein wrote:
> I have just obtained a Sonicwall TZ-150 wireless appliance and a
> Netgear EVA700 media player. The latter is a box that takes input from
> an RJ-45 cable or 802.11g radio waves, and outputs audio and video
> (analog) to a TV.
>
> These two devices are not playing nice. Perhaps this is a common theme
> in the world of 802.11g?
>
> I am thinking that I might have to try placing a wireless bridge
> between the two devices. What I mean is that I would continue to use
> the TZ-150 as a wireless router/firewall/access point. I would attach
> a simple bridge to the EVA700 via RJ-45 cable. The bridge would "talk" to
> the TZ-150 via radio and relay to the RJ-45 cable, out to the EVA700.
>
> Another midnight engineering project.
>
> My problem is that I can't find a decent bridge. I want WPA, and I
> want reasonable bandwidth, in order to support streaming MPEG
> bitstreams at HDTV bitrates. 15 Mbit/s. would be nice.
>
> The Linksys WET54G would be ideal, except that it might be a piece of
> shit. I have looked at the user reviews at Amazon.com and I am not
> encouraged.
>
> Am I going to have to deploy a full service wireless AP and configure
> it to be a simple bridge? Or is there a nice, compact bridge that
> doesn't suck?
>
> Thanks for any suggestions.
As far as the WET54G is concerned I have had pretty good luck with them
until recently. The last 3 that I have deployed (version 3 latest
firmware) lockup about once a week. I think I'll try and replace them
with WRT54GL's running dd-wrt and stay away from them in the future.
In article <4eg8o2p0sinjla4ortmsabqv9vdt33ci03@4ax.com>,
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>You might as well use a WRT54G or Buffalo router with DD-WRT in the
>client mode. That's because a dedicated bridge, game adapter,
>ethernet bridge, client radio, or whatever it's called this week, is
>possibly more expensive than the router. For example, the Buffalo
>WHR-HP-54G router is about $60 while the corresponding ethernet bridge
>WLI-TX4-G54HP is about the same price:
><http://www.buffalotech.com/products/product-detail.php?productid=118&categoryid=29>
>Might as well get the added features of the router.
Thanks for the response Jeff. I am looking at the Buffalo router, and
its slower cousin (ancestor?) the WHR-G54. The user manual does not
mention any bridging or client capability. I don't think this would be
a problem, because how would the router know that I am using it as a
bridge? I can think of one problem: the router might not want to assign
DHCP to clients on its wired interface, which is something that I'd like
to do. Can you think of any other problems I might have?
Or to put it in a more cheerful point of view, would a dedicated bridge
like the WLI-TX4-G54HP offer any useful features that a full service
router would not offer?
--
David Arnstein (00)
arnstein+usenet@pobox.com {{ }}
^^
>Thanks for the response Jeff. I am looking at the Buffalo router, and
>its slower cousin (ancestor?) the WHR-G54. The user manual does not
>mention any bridging or client capability.
The stock firmware does not have a client mode. That's why I
suggested DD-WRT replacement firmware. Le Tour de Firmware:
<http://www.informatione.gmxhome.de/DDWRT/Standard/V23final/Wireless_Basic.html>
See under Wireless mode pulldown.
>I don't think this would be
>a problem, because how would the router know that I am using it as a
>bridge?
Very easily. In infrastructure mode, there are access points and
clients. The way they act and protocols are quite different.
Normally, wireless routers and access points are not used as clients
unless they have a client mode.
Just to get complex, WDS (wireless distribution service) will do both
simultaneously, which actually may be an advantage. If you plug
directly into the ethernet port of the WDS client/bridge/access-point,
then it will act as an ordinary client bridge. However, if you
connect to it with another wireless client, it will extend your
wireless network (at the expense of a 50% maximum thruput slowdown).
>I can think of one problem: the router might not want to assign
>DHCP to clients on its wired interface, which is something that I'd like
>to do. Can you think of any other problems I might have?
Not a problem. The client bridge is transparent to broadcasts and
Layer 3 packets. A DHCP handshake should go right through the
wireless bridge like it wasn't there. Remember, 802.11 wireless is
nothing more than encapulated 802.3 ethernet packets.
>Or to put it in a more cheerful point of view, would a dedicated bridge
>like the WLI-TX4-G54HP offer any useful features that a full service
>router would not offer?
No. The WHR-HP-G54 with DD-WRT has all the features of the
WLI-TX4-G54HP client bridge. It's possible that the dedicated
wireless bridge might draw less power than the full router, but I
think it will be close.
If you're still shopping around, look for wireless game adapters. The
catch is that they're all *MORE* expensive than the equivalent
wireless router with a client mode. For example, the Dlink DGL-3420:
<http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=383>
costs about $85.
Hmmm...the similar DWL-G820 is cheaper at about $65.
<http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=333>
The Linksys assortment:
<http://www.linksys.com/servlet/Satellite?c=L_Product_C1&childpagename=US%2FLayout &cid=1115416940536&pagename=Linksys%2FCommon%2FVis itorWrapper>
Note that the buzzword "game adapter" seems to mean QoS that gives
preference to game related packets. There's no guarantee that your
video application will be in their pre-defined selection of games. QoS
is a good thing, but methinks it should include user configurable rule
sets.
More of the same:
<http://games.dlink.com>
<http://www.netgear.com/Products/Adapters/GWirelessAdapters/WGE111.aspx>
<http://www.actiontec.com/products/home_networking/54mbps_eth_adapter/index.php>
<http://www.smc.com/index.cfm?event=viewProduct&localeCode=EN_USA&cid= 5&scid=&pid=1474>
--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
> arnstein@panix.com (David Arnstein) hath wroth:
>
> >Thanks for the response Jeff. I am looking at the Buffalo router, and
> >its slower cousin (ancestor?) the WHR-G54. The user manual does not
> >mention any bridging or client capability.
>
> The stock firmware does not have a client mode. That's why I
> suggested DD-WRT replacement firmware. Le Tour de Firmware:
>
> <snip: too long url>
>
> See under Wireless mode pulldown.
>
> >I don't think this would be a problem, because how would the router know
> >that I am using it as a bridge?
>
> Very easily. In infrastructure mode, there are access points and
> clients. The way they act and protocols are quite different.
> Normally, wireless routers and access points are not used as clients
> unless they have a client mode.
>
> Just to get complex, WDS (wireless distribution service) will do both
> simultaneously, which actually may be an advantage. If you plug
> directly into the ethernet port of the WDS client/bridge/access-point,
> then it will act as an ordinary client bridge. However, if you
> connect to it with another wireless client, it will extend your
> wireless network (at the expense of a 50% maximum thruput slowdown).
My D-Link DWL-G700AP does that too! D-Link calls that repeater mode.
This model is being sold as an access point.
BTW I didn't know that it could also act as a client - which I now see
that it can. I've been using it to extend the coverage of my Trendnet
TEW-510APB.
So, if that's a repeater, then what is an extender?
>> Just to get complex, WDS (wireless distribution service) will do both
>> simultaneously, which actually may be an advantage. If you plug
>> directly into the ethernet port of the WDS client/bridge/access-point,
>> then it will act as an ordinary client bridge. However, if you
>> connect to it with another wireless client, it will extend your
>> wireless network (at the expense of a 50% maximum thruput slowdown).
>My D-Link DWL-G700AP does that too! D-Link calls that repeater mode.
Does what? The DWL-G700AP does not have a WDS mode. It can only act
as *EITHER* an access point, repeater, or client. See choices at:
<http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dwl700ap/adv_mode.html>
>This model is being sold as an access point.
>
>BTW I didn't know that it could also act as a client - which I now see
>that it can. I've been using it to extend the coverage of my Trendnet
>TEW-510APB.
I don't think it can *SIMULTANEOUSLY* act as an access point,
repeater, or client. However, I'm willing to be suprised. What
happens when you try it?
>So, if that's a repeater, then what is an extender?
A repeater and a range extender are the same thing. These just
retransmit packets using a store and forward system. To keep it from
repeating literally anything that it hears, some manner of filter
needs to be setup. Usually, it's by SSID, but it appears, from the
config page, that the DWL-G700AP will only repeat packets from one
specific access point MAC address.
WDS is quite different. It will simultaneously act as a client bridge
and as a repeater. It requires that both the main access point and
the remote device both support WDS. As a client, you just plug in a
CAT5 cable and it thinks it's a client bridge. As a repeater, you
connect via wireless to the WDS bridge, which then repeats the packets
to the main access point. Things get really complex when there's more
than two WDS bridges in the system. The big downside is that WPA
encryption usually doesn't work with WDS (except between DD-WRT
firmware devices).
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Distribution_System>
<http://www.proxim.com/support/techbulletins/TB-046.pdf>
<http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-how-to/how_to_wds_bridge>
(10 pages).
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
> hlexa@hotmail.com (Axel Hammerschmidt) hath wroth:
>
> >Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >> Just to get complex, WDS (wireless distribution service) will do both
> >> simultaneously, which actually may be an advantage. If you plug
> >> directly into the ethernet port of the WDS client/bridge/access-point,
> >> then it will act as an ordinary client bridge. However, if you
> >> connect to it with another wireless client, it will extend your
> >> wireless network (at the expense of a 50% maximum thruput slowdown).
>
> >My D-Link DWL-G700AP does that too! D-Link calls that repeater mode.
>
> Does what? The DWL-G700AP does not have a WDS mode. It can only act
> as *EITHER* an access point, repeater, or client. See choices at:
> <http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dwl700ap/adv_mode.html>
That's the DWL-700AP, not the DWL-_G_700AP.
> >This model is being sold as an access point.
> >
> >BTW I didn't know that it could also act as a client - which I now see
> >that it can. I've been using it to extend the coverage of my Trendnet
> >TEW-510APB.
>
> I don't think it can *SIMULTANEOUSLY* act as an access point,
> repeater, or client. However, I'm willing to be suprised. What
> happens when you try it?
I will try that, repeater and client. It can't "syemueltainiousley" :-)
be an access point, because there is only one RJ45 jack. But it being
able to be a client (Game Adapter) really surprised me.
>> >My D-Link DWL-G700AP does that too! D-Link calls that repeater mode.
>>
>> Does what? The DWL-G700AP does not have a WDS mode. It can only act
>> as *EITHER* an access point, repeater, or client. See choices at:
>> <http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dwl700ap/adv_mode.html>
>
>That's the DWL-700AP, not the DWL-_G_700AP.
I did that on purpose as the online emulator for the DWL-G700AP
doesn't have a client mode or repeater mode. There's no "mode" button
under the advanced tab:
<http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dwlg700ap/>
However, the above emulator link is for version 1.00 firmware and the
other modes may have been added later. I guess yours has a "mode"
button and really is a DWL-G700AP.
>I will try that, repeater and client. It can't "syemueltainiousley" :-)
>be an access point, because there is only one RJ45 jack. But it being
>able to be a client (Game Adapter) really surprised me.
Well sorta. If it had the WDS feature, it still might have just one
ethernet jack (for the wired client), but would still be able to
accept wireless connections and repeat them to the main access point.
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
> hlexa@hotmail.com (Axel Hammerschmidt) hath wroth:
>
> >Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>
> >> >My D-Link DWL-G700AP does that too! D-Link calls that repeater mode.
> >>
> >> Does what? The DWL-G700AP does not have a WDS mode. It can only act
> >> as *EITHER* an access point, repeater, or client. See choices at:
> >> <http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dwl700ap/adv_mode.html>
> >
> >That's the DWL-700AP, not the DWL-_G_700AP.
>
> I did that on purpose as the online emulator for the DWL-G700AP
> doesn't have a client mode or repeater mode. There's no "mode" button
> under the advanced tab:
> <http://support.dlink.com/emulators/dwlg700ap/>
> However, the above emulator link is for version 1.00 firmware and the
> other modes may have been added later. I guess yours has a "mode"
> button and really is a DWL-G700AP.
That (emulator) has firmware version 1.0. The "gismo" I have was bought
with version 2.0 firmware and has since been upgraded to v2.1, dated as
of March 2006. The H/W is a ver B1.
(It was bought in Europe)
> >I will try that, repeater and client. It can't "syemueltainiousley" :-)
> >be an access point, because there is only one RJ45 jack. But it being
> >able to be a client (Game Adapter) really surprised me.
>
> Well sorta. If it had the WDS feature, it still might have just one
> ethernet jack (for the wired client), but would still be able to
> accept wireless connections and repeat them to the main access point.
It worked as both a repeater and client simultaneously for a time -
until the browser in the laptops (Powerbook and Thinkpad) both were
pointed to Google. Then I lost the connection on the PB and the TP got
locked onto the access point that the repeater was supposed to repeat,
instead of the repeater itself. Scanning with the TP didn't work as it
should. The lappies and the DWL-G700AP were on the same desk. I'll try
it again and have the equipment spread out more.
But still, also being able to use the DWL-G700AP as a client is an
improvement. I've seen that the shops here are selling D-Link's DWL-G710
Extender - at almost twice the price. Maybe that model has improved WDS
features?
BTW. Turning on the log under Status on this DWL-G700AP reveals that it
uses a Linux OS. D-Link doesn't seem to have published the source code
for it, as they must under GPL.
I am running two Buffalo WHR-G54S (both DD-WRT v23 SP2) here. The
downstairs one is hooked to the Cable modem, set to AP, and acts as a
DHCP server. The upstairs WHR-G54S is set to Client-Bridge, DHCP forwarder.
Upstairs, I have at least two of three computers running and on the
net at the same time, W98SE (laptop), Warp4 (IBM 9595-OPT), and NT4 (IBM
9585-ONT).
Oddly, NT complains that a DHCP server can't be found, but running
IPCONFIG /all shows the downstairs WHR-G54S doing just that. I can run
Firefox from it without a problem.
I'll play with setting up a 9533 for a low power NAS eventually.
David Arnstein wrote:
> In article <4eg8o2p0sinjla4ortmsabqv9vdt33ci03@4ax.com>,
> Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
>> You might as well use a WRT54G or Buffalo router with DD-WRT in the
>> client mode. That's because a dedicated bridge, game adapter,
>> ethernet bridge, client radio, or whatever it's called this week, is
>> possibly more expensive than the router. For example, the Buffalo
>> WHR-HP-54G router is about $60 while the corresponding ethernet bridge
>> WLI-TX4-G54HP is about the same price:
>> <http://www.buffalotech.com/products/product-detail.php?productid=118&categoryid=29>
>> Might as well get the added features of the router.
>
> Thanks for the response Jeff. I am looking at the Buffalo router, and
> its slower cousin (ancestor?) the WHR-G54. The user manual does not
> mention any bridging or client capability. I don't think this would be
> a problem, because how would the router know that I am using it as a
> bridge? I can think of one problem: the router might not want to assign
> DHCP to clients on its wired interface, which is something that I'd like
> to do. Can you think of any other problems I might have?
>
> Or to put it in a more cheerful point of view, would a dedicated bridge
> like the WLI-TX4-G54HP offer any useful features that a full service
> router would not offer?
>It worked as both a repeater and client simultaneously for a time -
>until the browser in the laptops (Powerbook and Thinkpad) both were
>pointed to Google. Then I lost the connection on the PB and the TP got
>locked onto the access point that the repeater was supposed to repeat,
>instead of the repeater itself. Scanning with the TP didn't work as it
>should. The lappies and the DWL-G700AP were on the same desk. I'll try
>it again and have the equipment spread out more.
That's the difference between a "transparent bridge" and "client
bridge (or whatever)". The transparent bridge will bridge more than
one MAC address. The typical client bridge will only do one. John
Navas went through and obtained a list of bridges and whether they
will pass more than 1 IP:
<http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi#Wireless_Ethernet_Bridges>
No clue what the DWL-G700AP is doing.
>But still, also being able to use the DWL-G700AP as a client is an
>improvement. I've seen that the shops here are selling D-Link's DWL-G710
>Extender - at almost twice the price. Maybe that model has improved WDS
>features?
Well, the 1.00 firmware on the emulator shows no sign of WDS.
The US data sheet is the same:
<http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=357>
I'm fairly sure it's not WDS because the PDF data sheet says:
"The DWL-G710 is capable of repeating the wireless signal
from virtually all routers and access points on the market
today".
I wonder if this is a "virtual" feature.
>BTW. Turning on the log under Status on this DWL-G700AP reveals that it
>uses a Linux OS. D-Link doesn't seem to have published the source code
>for it, as they must under GPL.
Nifty. However, I don't think it will get their attention. DLink has
a long history of ignoring all criticism, including those from the
trade press. When their routers were caught pounding a public NTP
time server, their reaction was to do exactly nothing. At least
Netgear paid the server owner some cash for the inconvenience and
excessive bandwidth.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NTP_vandalism>
Well, well... Dlink finally settled (with undisclosed terms) 6 months
later.
<http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/09/danish-server-admin-exposes-d-links-ntp-vandalism/>
Looks like there's already some action in Germany against Dlink for
their NAS products:
<http://gpl-violations.org/news/20060922-dlink-judgement_frankfurt.html>
Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> wrote:
> hlexa@hotmail.com (Axel Hammerschmidt) hath wroth:
>
> >It worked as both a repeater and client simultaneously for a time -
> >until the browser in the laptops (Powerbook and Thinkpad) both were
> >pointed to Google. Then I lost the connection on the PB and the TP got
> >locked onto the access point that the repeater was supposed to repeat,
> >instead of the repeater itself. Scanning with the TP didn't work as it
> >should. The lappies and the DWL-G700AP were on the same desk. I'll try
> >it again and have the equipment spread out more.
>
> That's the difference between a "transparent bridge" and "client
> bridge (or whatever)". The transparent bridge will bridge more than
> one MAC address. The typical client bridge will only do one. John
> Navas went through and obtained a list of bridges and whether they
> will pass more than 1 IP:
> <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi#Wireless_Ethernet_Bridges>
> No clue what the DWL-G700AP is doing.
Tried it again. Adsl-modem - router with DHCP server - access point
(Trendnet TEW-510APB, 802.11a/b/g, WPA-PSK) in one end of the house. The
D-Link DWL-G700AP (H/W B1, f/w 2.1, WPA-PSK) set up as a repeater in the
other end of the house.
Connected a Powerbook (OS X 10.3.9) to the DWL-G700AP with a cable. The
PB got an ip-address from the router.
Connected a Thinkpad (W2K, Philips SNN6500 802.11a/b/g PC Card, WPA-PSK)
in the next room to the DWL-G700AP by wireless. The Philips client
software shows the MAC address as well as the SSID. The TP also got an
ip-address from the router. It took two tries - I think that was because
there wasn't a saved configuration profile for the repeater in the
client setup.
Surfed on both for about 10 minutes.
I'll try again later and have a look in logs of the TEW-510APB and
DWL-G700AP and see what it says about connected MAC addresses.
I will also try long enough for a re-keying in WPA-PSK.
> >But still, also being able to use the DWL-G700AP as a client is an
> >improvement. I've seen that the shops here are selling D-Link's DWL-G710
> >Extender - at almost twice the price. Maybe that model has improved WDS
> >features?
>
> Well, the 1.00 firmware on the emulator shows no sign of WDS.
> The US data sheet is the same:
> <http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=357>
> I'm fairly sure it's not WDS because the PDF data sheet says:
> "The DWL-G710 is capable of repeating the wireless signal
> from virtually all routers and access points on the market
> today".
> I wonder if this is a "virtual" feature.
Because it doesn't state specifically that WDS is supported?
As far as I can tell, the DWL-G710 is a repeater/extender only. It has
no access point or wireless client (game adapter) function.
<snip>
> Looks like there's already some action in Germany against Dlink for
> their NAS products:
> <http://gpl-violations.org/news/20060922-dlink-judgement_frankfurt.html>
Recommend a wireless bridge? 
Linear Mode
