WAP versus wireless router

Looking to set up a "hybrid" network at home. I will use my current
Ethernet and wish to add wireless function to remote desktop where I can't
get wires without an unsightly mess

I thought all I needed was a Wireless Access Point (such as Linksys WAP54G)
but then I saw a Linksys WRT54g wireless router that is described to have
"three in one" functionality. Those three functions are:
- WAP
- route
- 4 port switch

The WAP54G is about 20$ more expensive than the WRT54g, yet the WAP54g
appears to have only one function (it's a wireless access point)

The WRT54g is cheaper yet is advertised to offer more functions.

My question is this: Instead of buying the more expensive WAP, can I just
plug my cable modem into the WRT54G and use one of the 4 ports to Ethernet
my nearby desktop in addition to wirelessly connecting the remote desktop to
the net?

thx in advance
bob

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:39:54 -0700, "Bob" <tecolote@cox.net> wrote in
<v5Msj.15$QC.0@newsfe20.lga>:

>Looking to set up a "hybrid" network at home. I will use my current
>Ethernet and wish to add wireless function to remote desktop where I can't
>get wires without an unsightly mess

Have you considered powerline networking? It works quite well.

>I thought all I needed was a Wireless Access Point (such as Linksys WAP54G)
>but then I saw a Linksys WRT54g wireless router that is described to have
>"three in one" functionality. Those three functions are:
>- WAP
>- route
>- 4 port switch
>
>The WAP54G is about 20$ more expensive than the WRT54g, yet the WAP54g
>appears to have only one function (it's a wireless access point)
>
>The WRT54g is cheaper yet is advertised to offer more functions.

Yep. Wireless routers are often cheaper than wireless access points.

>My question is this: Instead of buying the more expensive WAP, can I just
>plug my cable modem into the WRT54G and use one of the 4 ports to Ethernet
>my nearby desktop in addition to wirelessly connecting the remote desktop to
>the net?

Sure. You can also configure it as a wireless access point if that
makes more sense.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://Wireless.wikia.com>
John Navas FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

Bob wrote:
> My question is this: Instead of buying the more expensive WAP, can I just
> plug my cable modem into the WRT54G and use one of the 4 ports to Ethernet
> my nearby desktop in addition to wirelessly connecting the remote desktop to
> the net?

Sure. Plug your ethernet cable modem into one of the four LAN ports of
the WRT54G. Wireless routers are cheaper because more are sold and the
cost goes down.

"Bob" <tecolote@cox.net> wrote in message news:v5Msj.15$QC.0@newsfe20.lga...
> Looking to set up a "hybrid" network at home. I will use my current
> Ethernet and wish to add wireless function to remote desktop where I can't
> get wires without an unsightly mess
>
> I thought all I needed was a Wireless Access Point (such as Linksys
> WAP54G) but then I saw a Linksys WRT54g wireless router that is described
> to have "three in one" functionality. Those three functions are:
> - WAP
> - route
> - 4 port switch
>
> The WAP54G is about 20$ more expensive than the WRT54g, yet the WAP54g
> appears to have only one function (it's a wireless access point)
>
> The WRT54g is cheaper yet is advertised to offer more functions.
>
> My question is this: Instead of buying the more expensive WAP, can I just
> plug my cable modem into the WRT54G and use one of the 4 ports to Ethernet
> my nearby desktop in addition to wirelessly connecting the remote desktop
> to the net?
>
> thx in advance
> bob
>
>
I have a hybrid setup here. D-link wired router talks to the outside, then a
few desktop units wired to it. D-link does any dhcp requests.
One of the 4 lan ports on the D-link goes to a LAN port on the Linksys - NOT
the uplink port.
Other 3 ports can be used to plug a wired ethernet connection for a
visiting computer that does not have wireless.
For the linksys, turn on WPA and related, turn off firewall, and turn off
dhcp
I have the D-link as 192.169.0.1, and the Linksys as 192.168.0.2. Default
for the linksys is 192.168.1.1, which puts it on a different subnet here -
ok if you want internet access only, but I also need to access my wired
file/print server
I can turn the Linksys off, or reset it, and the rest of the network is not
affected.

You can use the Linksys as your internet access point router/firewall, and
it will be both a wired hub and wireless access point. Only problem is that
the preferred location for you wired hub may give very poor wireless signal
to where you want to work. For the few extra $$, I like to be able to move
the wireless to the best spot within the restraint of cables.

Stuart


Stuart

"Bob" <tecolote@cox.net> hath wroth:

>Looking to set up a "hybrid" network at home. I will use my current
>Ethernet and wish to add wireless function to remote desktop where I can't
>get wires without an unsightly mess.

Yeah, I know the feeling. If you look at any of the advertisements
for computers, you never see any wires, cables, or even power cords in
the photos. I suspect it goes back to Adam, Eve, and the snake, where
the wires represent the evil snake. At least you're in the right
newsgroup. We don't do wires (or snakes) in wireless land.

>I thought all I needed was a Wireless Access Point (such as Linksys WAP54G)
>but then I saw a Linksys WRT54g wireless router that is described to have
>"three in one" functionality. Those three functions are:
>- WAP
>- route
>- 4 port switch

Yep. That's the way it works. More accurate would be:
- Router/firewall/NAT/DHCP/etc
- Wireless access point or wireless bridge.
- 5 port ethernet switch, where one port goes internally to
the wireless access point section.

>The WAP54G is about 20$ more expensive than the WRT54g, yet the WAP54g
>appears to have only one function (it's a wireless access point)

Well, it can also act as a wireless client bridge, but you don't need
that.

>The WRT54g is cheaper yet is advertised to offer more functions.

Yep. Lots more routers are sold than access points. So, routers are
cheaper.

>My question is this: Instead of buying the more expensive WAP, can I just
>plug my cable modem into the WRT54G and use one of the 4 ports to Ethernet
>my nearby desktop in addition to wirelessly connecting the remote desktop to
>the net?

Yep. What you're doing is converting your wireless router into a
wireless access point. See:
<http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi_How_To#Use_a_wireless_router_as_a_wireless_acce ss_point>

However, I think you *MIGHT* be doing this wrong. It would have been
nice if you had listed the maker and model number of your cable
"modem". It might be more than just a modem and include router and
NAT functionality. If it does, you're doing this the right way by
turning the WRT54G into an access point. However, if the cable modem
really is a dumb modem, with no NAT functionality, then you need the
router section in the WRT54G to handle the multiple PC's. My
guess(tm) is that you're ok because you apparently already have
multiple PC's connected to your cable modem.



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

> Sure. Plug your ethernet cable modem into one of the four LAN ports of
> the WRT54G.

Why would he do that? If he's on a cable modem it's probably only serving
up one IP address; to the connected desktop. Connecting the router's WAN
port to the cable modem will let him then support multiple internal IP
addresses.

It's possible his cable modem also has router functionality. Some do, but
often it's crippled compared to what can be found in a more robust device
like the WRT54G. So if his cable modem IS a router then he'd do well to
configure it to operate solely as bridge and use the functions in the WRT54G
instead.

The wiring would be cable->cable modem->WAN port on WRT54G and then up to
four wired PCs and then wireless devices. He could even use on of the LAN
ports with a powerline ethernet device. I generally dislike them as my
experience with them has never been satisfactory (noise disrupts them, they
burn out, etc). Newer ones appear to "suck less" but still seem to have
reliability problems.

Running wire is rarely as impossible as people believe. Walls are generally
hollow and if there's wire in there now it's likely more can be run without
all that much hassle. It's not as easy as wireless, of course, but nothing
else matches the performance and reliability of good old wired ethernet.

-Bill Kearney

On 14 Feb, 15:51, "Bill Kearney" <wkearne...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Sure. Plug your ethernet cable modem into one of the four LAN ports of
> > the WRT54G.
>
> Why would he do that? If he's on a cable modem it's probably only serving
> up one IP address; to the connected desktop. Connecting the router's WAN
> port to the cable modem will let him then support multiple internal IP
> addresses.
>
> It's possible his cable modem also has router functionality. Some do, but
> often it's crippled compared to what can be found in a more robust device
> like the WRT54G. So if his cable modem IS a router then he'd do well to
> configure it to operate solely as bridge and use the functions in the WRT54G
> instead.
>
> The wiring would be cable->cable modem->WAN port on WRT54G and then up to
> four wired PCs and then wireless devices. He could even use on of the LAN
> ports with a powerline ethernet device. I generally dislike them as my
> experience with them has never been satisfactory (noise disrupts them, they
> burn out, etc). Newer ones appear to "suck less" but still seem to have
> reliability problems.
>
> Running wire is rarely as impossible as people believe. Walls are generally
> hollow and if there's wire in there now it's likely more can be run without
> all that much hassle. It's not as easy as wireless, of course, but nothing
> else matches the performance and reliability of good old wired ethernet.
>
> -Bill Kearney

I agree, wired all the way for reliability, performance and security.

----------------------------------------------------------
http://homenet.mypressonline.com - Home networking resource site,
articles, reviews and guides.

Bill Kearney wrote:
>> Sure. Plug your ethernet cable modem into one of the four LAN ports of
>> the WRT54G.
>
> Why would he do that?

Ummm...because that's what he asked if he could do?

"DTC" <me@nothingtoseehere.zzx> wrote in message
news:UE5tj.594$Mh2.65@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com...
> Bill Kearney wrote:
>>> Sure. Plug your ethernet cable modem into one of the four LAN ports of
>>> the WRT54G.
>>
>> Why would he do that?
>
> Ummm...because that's what he asked if he could do?

No, that's not what he asked. Your answer is like saying "yes, you can buy
a wrench to pound in nails".

What he asked was whether to get a router instead of an access point, based
on the price difference. And if he's going to use a router then there are
configuration steps needed. Since he's a new user, or at least relatively
un-informed, it would raise the potential for a lot of confusion to try
using the LAN ports on the router alone as just a switch hanging off the
cable modem. Yes, it "can" be done, just like using a wrench to bang in
nails. But it'll end up being quite confusing to the new user when trying
to read the documentation or, god forbid, get help from this cable company.