Router-router to create extended LAN network

[Jimbo Mahoney]

Hi all,

Here's my setup, but I can't get it to work:

Virgin media hub - 192.168.0.1 with DHCP handing out 192.168.0.10 onwards
Secondary Router running tomato.

The secondary router is connected to the Virgin hub via Powerline adapters.

I assumed that if I set the secondary (tomato) router to a static IP such as 192.168.0.2 and the same subnet (and default gateway to the primary router - i.e. 192.168.0.1), that I would be able to connect to it it in the following ways:

Wireless (for admin)
LAN

However, neither work.

I want to create a network such that, whether I connect wirelessly (via Primary i.e. Virgin Hub) or wired through the secondary, everything can see everything else.

Is this possible?

What am I doing wrong?

I'm guessing it's something to do with DHCP because when I connect to the secondary router, I don't get an IP assigned. I assumed that if the default gateway was the primary, I would get assigned a DHCP that way?

Thanks!

 

[the-evaluator]

What port on the secondary router did you connect the cable from the Powerline too? It needs to be a LAN port, NOT the WAN port. The IP address assigned to the secondary router, is that on the LAN or WAN interface? It needs to be on the LAN interface.

If it is connected there, connect a laptop to the ethernet port on the Powerline and see if you have connectivity.

Your setup is very far from ideal, Powerline adapters are generally a bit crap but your setup should work. If you just want a wireless access point where the secondary router currently is then a much more reliable option would be a specific wireless access point connected back to the VM Hub by an ethernet cable. If you want ethernet ports there too then a switch and wireless access point would be needed.

 

[joey1211]

There's an option in Tomato to convert the WAN port to a regular LAN port.

https://forum.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/WAN_Port

 

[joey1211]

Also try assigning a manual IP address on the device to see if it then connects.

 

[Jimbo Mahoney]

What port on the secondary router did you connect the cable from the Powerline too? It needs to be a LAN port, NOT the WAN port. The IP address assigned to the secondary router, is that on the LAN or WAN interface? It needs to be on the LAN interface.

If it is connected there, connect a laptop to the ethernet port on the Powerline and see if you have connectivity.

Your setup is very far from ideal, Powerline adapters are generally a bit crap but your setup should work. If you just want a wireless access point where the secondary router currently is then a much more reliable option would be a specific wireless access point connected back to the VM Hub by an ethernet cable. If you want ethernet ports there too then a switch and wireless access point would be needed.

Brilliant, thanks! It was because I had the secondary's WAN port connected.

Working great now it's connected to LAN!

I know the Powerline adapters aren't the best, but as you can imagine, it's the neatest way for me to connect things together without running cables under / around doors and/or through walls.

Having said that, I still get 90 Mbps download speeds over them! (Wireless is ironically slightly faster @ 102 Mbps).

I basically use wireless on the ground and first floor, but wired in the loft conversion.

Trying to set up a NAS that's accessible over both ethernet and wireless...

There's an option in Tomato to convert the WAN port to a regular LAN port.

https://forum.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/WAN_Port

Thanks - I understand what that checkbox does now - I'll give that a whirl too, just so I can easily recognise which cable is which!

EDIT - weird - I get higher Speedtest results using a "real" LAN port (90 Mbps vs. 80 Mbps on the WAN as LAN). Could be a fluke, but I'll leave it on the LAN port.

 

[the-evaluator]

Great, glad to hear it's working.

EDIT - weird - I get higher Speedtest results using a "real" LAN port (90 Mbps vs. 80 Mbps on the WAN as LAN). Could be a fluke, but I'll leave it on the LAN port.

No, it's not a fluke. I'd expect it. The WAN port won't be on the same switch fabric as the LAN ports so LAN traffic using the WAN port would be switched in software rather than hardware which will likely give lower speeds. Reassigning ports in that way is a bit of a hack and best avoided if at all possible.

 

[Jimbo Mahoney]

UPDATE - actually, I ended up replacing the router with a Gigabit switch.

The router was getting a bit old (2.4 GHz wireless and 100Mbit LAN) and this has improved my wired throughput (obviously).

What wasn't immediately obvious, but is welcome, is that I now also get better internet speeds through the powerlines from elsewhere in the house.

i.e. the rate-limiting step was actually the 100 Mbit router, not the powerlines!

I always assumed the powerlines were limited / crappy, but that's not the case (at least for internet i.e. ~100 Mbit speeds).

Result!

Plus the new switch was only £10 and uses less power than the old router.