Re: wireless LAN in place of existing cabled one
----- Original Message -----
From: "BruceG" <griffisb@bellsouth.net>
To: <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 1:06 PM
Subject: Re: wireless LAN in place of existing cabled one
> On Thursday 13 November 2003 20:15, Benedict Verheyen wrote:
> > Op do 13-11-2003, om 02:12 schreef BruceG:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > For the wireless bridge to work, it would need to connect to a WAP
> > > (wireless access point). Since your Server is upstairs, you could
do
> > > something like this (assuming your cable or DSL is dropped off
with an
> > > Ethernet connection, not USB):
> > >
> > > DSL line in to providers DSL Router/modem (with an Ethernet port,
not
> > > USB!) ---> Ethernet port to a wireless router - Linksys BEFW11S4
costs
> > > $69.99 at Amazon.com. Check out the Broadband forums. Linksys
forum is
> > > here: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/equip,16
> > > The router has 2 "connections". An Ethernet port to
your DSL
> > > modem
> > > A wireless connection for your home LAN
> > >
> > >
> > > V
> > > Linksys WET11 upstairs. $84.88 at Amazon.com
> > >
> > > The WET11 bridge has an Ethernet port for your PC, or
> > > connect it to a hub or switch to serve multiple PCs.
> > >
> > > A couple notes: The Wireless router can serve multiple wireless
clients.
> > > You can connect a couple wireless bridges to it, or a wireless
bridge and
> > > also support laptops with wireless cards. My WAP54G supports a
bridge and
> > > a cardbus card. The wireless stuff I support a church has 2 WET11
bridges
> > > connected, a total of 5 PCs bridged in. It can support additional
> > > wireless clients.
> > >
> > > 802.11B is 10 MBPS. 802.11G can go to 54MBPS. You may be limited
by
> > > distance. I figure since my DSL connection is 256Meg or so - 10
Meg is
> > > okay on the LAN side, although it can get slow doing backups over
> > > wireless.
> > >
> > > I'm sure D-Link can do the same using the a wireless router
downstairs
> > > and a wireless bridge upstairs.
> >
> > If i understand correctly, i could install a wireless router just
behind
> > the cable modem, plug in such a wireless bridge in eth0 of my
server,
> > and keep the rest of the network like it is namely: eth1 of the
server
> > connected to a hub and my pc ( pc1 ) also connected to the hub. This
> > would provide internet access to both the server and pc1. Right?
> > The eth0 would off course not receive a public ip anymore although
that
> > would be cool if it could be done.
> > And this wouldn't require me to config anything in linux then?
> >
> > If i want to make sure that all future traffic (laptops or pc not in
the
> > same room as the hub) goes via the hub, could i plug in a wireless
> > access point in the hub and redirect all traffic via that access
point
> > instead of directly through the router?
> >
> > Benedict
>
> The wireless router would get it's IP address and DNS servers from
your ISP.
> It would connect directly to your DSL modem using it's WAN port. The
wireless
> router would serve as a dhcp server for clients off it's LAN port.
Your
> server (and all PCs) would talk through the wireless router.
>
> If you want to continue using your server as a dhcp server, proxy
server, ...
> - you would use a wireless access point (a WAP). If you use a WAP,
your
> existing LAN would still communicate as it does now. All you would be
doing
> is replacing your LAN cable between floors with a wirless drop.
>
> Check out the broadband forums (do a google on broad band forums). The
folks
> on the forums can tell you exactly what you need and how it works. I
can tell
> you what I use and have configured and how that works - which may be
slightly
> different.
>
> By the way - I am using:
> A Linksys BEFSX41 router (had this when I was going wired)
> A Linksys WAP54G (for wireless clients, it "bridges"
wireless
> clients into the wired LAN)
> A Linksys WET11 bridge (for wirelessly bridging in a small wired
LAN
> upstairs)
> A Linksys 54G CadBus card (for my wife's laptop)
>
> You would skip the Linksys router part and continue using your server
as the
> router. That would mean you would need a WAP and a bridge (or a
wireless card
> that works in your server - the bridge is MUCH easier to set up and
gives a
> greater distance).
>
Cool, thanks for the info!
Benedict
Reply to: