# Modem > Switch > Wifi Router



## mittos (Jul 9, 2014)

Hey Guys,

New here, thanks for any advice / help in advance.

Here's the deal, I have Atlantic Broadband, the cable comes in on the west side of the house. A wireless router in that room doesn't have the range to feed the whole house, our bedrooms are one the east side of the house. The only PC in the modem room is my desktop, used primarily for work / gaming so it needs good connectivity. I thought if I bought an ethernet switch I could solve my problem but it seems to be a little more complex than that. 

I was planning on hooking the modem (Arris Cable Modem) to a Desktop Switch (TP-Link 5 Port). Then connect my PC  to the switch, this works fine. Now for the Wireless Router (Linksys N300). I have a very very long cat5 cable and ran that to the middle of the house, one end to the switch and the other to the Wifi Router (duh).  Our laptops can connect to the WiFi but no internet.

I was reading I had to change the IP settings on the Wifi and something about the DCHP? I'm a little lost.

Hope you folks can help me out.


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 9, 2014)

modem > router > switch

profit


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Jul 9, 2014)

Well, first, That modem doesn't do DHCP. You computer shouldn't have a local address with that modem but the IP that your ISP gives you.. Normally, if the modem doesn't do routing, you need to put a router after the modem, to have an IP, let's say 192.168.0.***

Since your computer is in the Modem room, I would put a router there, then the cable to the wireless router or access point. Modem to WAN port of a router, then LAN 1, 2, 3, or 4 to LAN port of wireless router. Why? cause you want the main router to generate the DHCP so that there will be no conflict.


You need to make sure that the wireless router has no DHCP enable for that. Do not plug into WAN port.

but I guess your wireless router is not enought strong from the modem room for the whole house?


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 9, 2014)

you could always just use two longer cables.

from the modem to the wireless router on the other side of the house with a long cable
and then
a cable from that to the switch and PC in the modem room.


----------



## de.das.dude (Jul 9, 2014)

if you dont do any sort of serious gaming that requires squeaky pings. you can always use a wireless router that works with bridges. Then you can buy bridges that go into outlets direct and expand you range.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 9, 2014)

ChristTheGreat said:


> Well, first, That modem doesn't do DHCP. You computer shouldn't have a local address with that modem but the IP that your ISP gives you.. Normally, if the modem doesn't do routing, you need to put a router after the modem, to have an IP, let's say 192.168.0.***



Sorry christ but that modem will pull DHCP since he is getting a dynamic public IP from his ISP BUT the limiting factor will be on what their MAC limit is. My ISP is 1 per modem and the ISP I work for is 3 per. With that aside I would not use a switch right off the modem due to the fact that the PC and the router will not be on the same network is they were to somehow pull two separate public IPs and this could be a problem for LAN streaming.

I would pickup a cheap wired router and set the wireless router in AP mode so all DHCP and NAT will come from the initial wired router.


----------



## mittos (Jul 10, 2014)

Wait a second, lets back up. So the TP-Link "Desktop Switch" I bought isn't a router? I know a little about networking but I'm definitely confused. I figured this would be very simple.


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 10, 2014)

Scrizz said:


> modem > router > switch
> 
> profit


do that with your long cables and you're set.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 10, 2014)

mittos said:


> Wait a second, lets back up. So the TP-Link "Desktop Switch" I bought isn't a router? I know a little about networking but I'm definitely confused. I figured this would be very simple.




no. a switch doesnt do DHCP, so its not a router. you'll need your setup to be modem -> router -> switch


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Jul 10, 2014)

brandonwh64 said:


> Sorry christ but that modem will pull DHCP since he is getting a dynamic public IP from his ISP BUT the limiting factor will be on what their MAC limit is. My ISP is 1 per modem and the ISP I work for is 3 per. With that aside I would not use a switch right off the modem due to the fact that the PC and the router will not be on the same network is they were to somehow pull two separate public IPs and this could be a problem for LAN streaming.
> 
> I would pickup a cheap wired router and set the wireless router in AP mode so all DHCP and NAT will come from the initial wired router.



The DHCP comes from the ISP not the modem. It will only route the IP address to the MAC address it will get at the end, b ut the modem doesn't do local DHCP... If the ISP tolerate 3 MAC, that is different, but that modem doesn't do local DHCP. Which was my main concern, as it is better to have a router after the modem, it's another security.

Personnally, I wouldn't put a cheap router, as a cheap router can be limitating, depending of the usage. Like if there is 1 computer and 3-4 laptop or device, a really cheap router might hang.. like a DIR-61* or these cheap router that has maximum 32 max simultaneous connection. He could use his wireless router, if he can runs 2 cable, instead buy a not bad router, but doesn'T need to be 100$. There is pretty good router at 50-60$



Mussels said:


> no. a switch doesnt do DHCP, so its not a router. you'll need your setup to be modem -> router -> switch



Just to add as info, unmanaged switch can't do DHCP. Managed switch can have this option, but not the same price


----------



## Disparia (Jul 10, 2014)

What I do to remember the difference is remember this little saying: "Routers route, and switches switch".


----------



## Mussels (Jul 10, 2014)

Jizzler said:


> What I do to remember the difference is remember this little saying: "Routers route, and switches switch".




i just remember it as a switch not having a DHCP server, lol.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 10, 2014)

ChristTheGreat said:


> The DHCP comes from the ISP not the modem. It will only route the IP address to the MAC address it will get at the end, b ut the modem doesn't do local DHCP... If the ISP tolerate 3 MAC, that is different, but that modem doesn't do local DHCP. Which was my main concern, as it is better to have a router after the modem, it's another security.



This is true it is just a gateway to their network but they do pull DHCP just not from the modem  
Yea I would suggest buying a access point or if he has a old PC to throw IPcop or IPfire on it and use it as a temp router but this would require two ethernet ports.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 10, 2014)

For my network to work, I need to enable DHCP on both the modem and the router.

Strange.


----------



## Disparia (Jul 10, 2014)

silkstone said:


> For my network to work, I need to enable DHCP on both the modem and the router.
> 
> Strange.



Not so much. If your router isn't dynamically assigned an address, you must statically assign it yourself.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 10, 2014)

many modems are technically routers, and with DHCP disabled they dont pass anything through. you just DMZ them to the second router and call it a day.


----------



## sttubs (Jul 10, 2014)

Scrizz said:


> modem > router > switch



Start with this ^^^^.  
Model numbers of your equipment may help.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 10, 2014)

silkstone said:


> For my network to work, I need to enable DHCP on both the modem and the router.
> 
> Strange.



Yea I have seen some providers use a modem/router combo and it has some crazy settings.


----------



## Scrizz (Jul 10, 2014)

brandonwh64 said:


> Yea I have seen some providers use a modem/router combo and it has some crazy settings.


yeah gateways with built in router and switch


----------



## remixedcat (Jul 10, 2014)

Do not use range extenders they will halve your bandwidth.

Use acess points instead.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 10, 2014)

remixedcat said:


> Do not use range extenders they will halve your bandwidth.
> 
> Use acess points instead.



Yep! This! I have a AP in my bedroom that is running in extender mode and I get good signal but speeds are much slower than being right next to the gateway AP. I am going to get off my lazy ass one day and run a line from my gig switch to that AP LOL.


----------



## silkstone (Jul 11, 2014)

Jizzler said:


> Not so much. If your router isn't dynamically assigned an address, you must statically assign it yourself.



I do statically assign an IP, although it works on dynamic too, just when I turn off DHCP on the modem, everything stops working. It's really strange.

My set up is all home bought. I run it in this configuration Modem>Wifi/Router ---- Repeater Bridge (wireless) That config works well for me, although it might not be appropriate for the OP. I only connect a print server + mobile devices to the RB, so bandwidth isn't really a concern.

It's also a PITA setting up a RB compared with a wired AP, I still don't understand how my settings actually work, I just tinkered with it until they finally all connected together and worked.


----------



## Mussels (Jul 11, 2014)

brandonwh64 said:


> Yep! This! I have a AP in my bedroom that is running in extender mode and I get good signal but speeds are much slower than being right next to the gateway AP. I am going to get off my lazy ass one day and run a line from my gig switch to that AP LOL.





remixedcat said:


> Do not use range extenders they will halve your bandwidth.
> 
> Use acess points instead.



wifi client routers are also a great idea. TP link have a few cheap ones that connect to the wifi, and pass through ethernet devices as if they were wifi clients (they get an IP direct from the original routers DHCP).


----------



## Disparia (Jul 11, 2014)

silkstone said:


> I do statically assign an IP, although it works on dynamic too, just when I turn off DHCP on the modem, everything stops working. It's really strange.
> 
> My set up is all home bought. I run it in this configuration Modem>Wifi/Router ---- Repeater Bridge (wireless) That config works well for me, although it might not be appropriate for the OP. I only connect a print server + mobile devices to the RB, so bandwidth isn't really a concern.
> 
> It's also a PITA setting up a RB compared with a wired AP, I still don't understand how my settings actually work, I just tinkered with it until they finally all connected together and worked.



In that case, strange indeed. But I suppose I haven't messed with them in about 2 years though and things can change. The last one they upgraded me to didn't have a user accessible configuration screen. Had to call in and a tech handled my settings.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 11, 2014)

Mussels said:


> wifi client routers are also a great idea. TP link have a few cheap ones that connect to the wifi, and pass through ethernet devices as if they were wifi clients (they get an IP direct from the original routers DHCP).



Yea thats true if you were doing many AP's in one LAN. If I were building a 5+ AP setup I would go with unifi but that would be over kill in this situation.

This is what I use at home to extend my wireless to the other side of my house. They are very stable but range is not the greatest. 







http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16833156275


----------



## remixedcat (Jul 11, 2014)

Well my router is a Meraki z1 and I got two Aruba RAP109 APs and a Meraki MR12 AP.

All enterprise gear here.


----------



## Pehla (Aug 10, 2014)

i just wanted to read and learn some about networking...,but daaaaamn this is confusing!!!
i actualy have issues with my home network..,its moslty all wireles..,i have 5ghz kit on the roof and its powerd over ethernet,now afther that (thing)
i conected i switch then have it separated to 3 diferent parts of house...(think of it as 3 diferent apartmans)
now on my end of the cable i have 150n wifi router...,and when i conect it with my laptop i only get around 2mb/s speed and if im conected directly on the roof kit i get full speed the i pay for (6mb/s)
bad cables?? bad aragments of the switches ,routers??


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Aug 10, 2014)

Pehla said:


> i just wanted to read and learn some about networking...,but daaaaamn this is confusing!!!
> i actualy have issues with my home network..,its moslty all wireles..,i have 5ghz kit on the roof and its powerd over ethernet,now afther that (thing)
> i conected i switch then have it separated to 3 diferent parts of house...(think of it as 3 diferent apartmans)
> now on my end of the cable i have 150n wifi router...,and when i conect it with my laptop i only get around 2mb/s speed and if im conected directly on the roof kit i get full speed the i pay for (6mb/s)
> bad cables?? bad aragments of the switches ,routers??



So let's break this down into a very simple situation.  Assuming you've got more than a basic knowledge of routing please ignore what I'm about to say.

Every single device connected to the internet has a two part address.  Part 1 is based on hardware, and is called a MAC.  This address is hard coded into the hardware, and is functionally never going to change.  Part 2 is the IP address.  This sucker can change, based upon assignment by any device.  It is the one that networking generally uses so that you know where to send data packets.

For the purposes of networking, a MAC is fundamentally ignored.  Your ISP might limit the modem to allowing information through only to a single MAC address, but that's generally not a problem in home networking.


The IP address is the difficulty here.  It's a string of four numbers, which range from 0 to 255 (000.000.000.000 to 255.255.255.255), and function as a dynamic identifier of who is to receive data packets.  Using another analogy, this is very much like an address.

So routers, modems, and switches (hubs have functionally died, with the exception of USB) all serve different purposes in our analogy.  The modem is responsible for converting our incoming and outgoing data into useable formats.  In the simplest terms, that cat5 wire has 8 conductors and the cable modem connects with a single conductor.  In the address analogy the modem is a post office.  They transfer data.

The switch is like an idiot savant post master.  Switches transfer data very quickly, but can't assign anything an address dynamically (managed switches avoid this, but we're talking a consumer level piece of hardware).  If someone's address appears, they deliver it wherever they remember that address being.  This works great, assuming that you've got a big pool of static addresses.  Referring back to the address pool, that means we could have about 255^4= 4.29 billion dynamic addresses for every connected device.  Looking back at this possibility, it's unrealistic given that we already have more than 6 billion people on the planet.

A router is the post master general.  They can assign a single address to a large block of people, subsequently creating an artificial division of addresses for a single physical one.  In the networking world, this is getting a single IP address, and connecting a dozen devices to the internet via that one address.  The problem here is that routing requires more computational power, and introduces delays into the system.  While this has largely been addressed with faster routers, it is always a concern.


So, why do the astute people in this thread say modem->router->switch is the proper connection methodology?  It's simple.  The switch can't create an artificial network address pool, so it won't work the other way around.  hypothetically you could viably have both of the following connected to the same exact network without any problem sending packets:



modem-183.183.183.001->router
-192.168.0.2->PC
-192.168.0.3->PC                                                      
-192.168.0.4->Switch
-192.168.0.5->PC
-192.168.0.6->TV


modem-183.183.183.002->router
-192.168.0.2->PC
-192.168.0.3->PC
-192.168.0.4->PC
-192.168.0.5->Switch
-192.168.0.6->PC
-192.168.0.7->TV
-192.168.0.8->PC


In contrast, the switch could only do the following:

modem-183.183.183.001->Switch
-183.183.183.001->PC
-183.183.183.001->PC
-183.183.183.001->router
-192.168.0.2->PC
-192.168.0.3->TV

As multiple devices share the same IP pool, all devices see the same data.  With multiple devices trying to complete handshakes and the like, only one device will actually work.  Thus, no home network can function as modem->switch->router.





Now addressing speed, there's a bundle of problems there.  Most routers have some sort of built-in filtering and security features.  Certain ports are automatically closed, etc....  The net result of this is lower speeds, but greater protection against intrusion.  It isn't by any means real protection, but it does offer cursory protection from drive-by pinging of ports to determine security flaws.  Other routers have built-in firewalls, that inspect packet activity to try and prevent certain actions.  Again, speed is given up for security. 

Hooking a computer directly up to the modem will always produce the greatest speeds, but it is inherently riskier than hiding behind protection.  You decide what protection is reasonable, and how much speed you really need.




Edit:
Changed formatting of IP addresses.  Not sure how to show this best...


----------



## OneMoar (Aug 12, 2014)

modem first then router then switch the switch CAN NOT GO BEFORE the router because the router is what handles DHCP
Unless your router is utter crap or has some silly QOS enabled by default there should be none to little impact on performance


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 12, 2014)

A router is a switch.

Ive seen homes where theres a modem then a switch then a wifi router. Especially homes with a network panel. Uverse IP tv over ethernet can use a switch to feed data to all tvs as long as you have 1 line going from the R.G. to the switch.


----------



## OneMoar (Aug 12, 2014)

depends on if the switch is a DUMB or smart switch


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 12, 2014)

These are what we use at work. Reliable as hell, http://www.netgear.com/business/products/switches/unmanaged/GS108.aspx#tab-techspecs

 ethernet uses 2 pairs in cat 5, (green ,orange) gigabit uses all 4


----------



## remixedcat (Aug 12, 2014)

yeah but do you use VLANs???


----------



## Mussels (Aug 12, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> A router is a switch.
> 
> Ive seen homes where theres a modem then a switch then a wifi router. Especially homes with a network panel. Uverse IP tv over ethernet can use a switch to feed data to all tvs as long as you have 1 line going from the R.G. to the switch.




no. a router is a switch with DHCP and routing - aka port forwards, automated or manual.

If you disable all those features, a router can be turned into a switch... but if you treat them as the same, you're gunna have a very screwed up network.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Aug 12, 2014)

eidairaman1 said:


> A router is a switch.
> 
> Ive seen homes where theres a modem then a switch then a wifi router. Especially homes with a network panel. Uverse IP tv over ethernet can use a switch to feed data to all tvs as long as you have 1 line going from the R.G. to the switch.




Put simply, no.

Even a managed switch will require some extra chutzpah to create its own home network.  Most of the time what you are getting here is a modem with a built-in router.  That router isn't a separate device, and thus people often confuse the lack of an extra box for a lack of the device itself.

If you spend a moment on a site like newegg, you might be able to clear this up.  There are actually routers with only two ethernet ports.  In this way they take data in, split it off, then send it out.  Most routers need to be more functional, so they generally have a switch built into them.  This is why you can have a 5 port router, a two port router, or a 24 port router.  The description has, over time, simply become a router.  Years ago it was a router with a built-in ## port switch.


On the higher end side, some managed switches will come with rudimentary DHCP features.  These things don't generally hit consumer hands, because the cost is much higher than your standard 5 port unmanaged gigabit switch.




Moving on to the assertion about communication wiring, that is in the right ballpark, but at the wrong address.

The difference in wiring is immaterial.  Cat5, Cat5e, and Cat6 wires all have four pairs of twisted wires.  Base 100, or fast ethernet, doesn't actively use all four pairs.  Base 1000, or gigabit ethernet, does actively use all four pairs.  Cat5 wiring can take the data transmission of gigabit ethernet speeds, but as the wire length increases cross-talk makes the transmission less and less reliable.  Likewise, Cat6 wire could transmit fast ethernet speeds without a problem.  

The big improvement with gigabit networking is auto-negotiation of communication.  Anyone who has been around the block for a while will tell you at least once they were thwarted by a surprise cross-over cable requirement, or have someone sure their hardware was broken because they connected everything up and used one cross-over cable somewhere (instead of straight-throughs).


----------



## remixedcat (Aug 12, 2014)

You will need a L3 managed switch if you wanna do QoS, client management, VLANs, etc...


----------

