2 Routers vs Mesh?

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.

2 Routers vs Mesh?

This thread has been locked for further replies. You can start a new thread to share your ideas or ask questions.
2 Routers vs Mesh?
2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-25 14:27:53 - last edited 2021-05-29 20:18:36
Model: Archer C2600  
Hardware Version: V2
Firmware Version: 1.3.4 Build 20200512 rel.51608(4555)

HI there, recently I purchased the Amazon Eero mesh system. I'm not a fan, some of my older devices that are 2.4 ghz refuse to connect even with every single step was followed.

 

So I'm trying to see if I can bridge 2 routers together wirelessly instead of getting another mesh system.

 

I currently own a C2600 (V2) and know it has WDS Bridge mode. But is it reliable bridging to another router? I figured it wouldn't be as reliable as mesh technology but I have the following options:

 

I can connect both routers 2 seperate RJ45 jacks that connect to my HH3000. If they are both wired, can I somehow bride them together through ethernet to the modem instead of WiFi?

  0      
  0      
#1
Options
1 Accepted Solution
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?-Solution
2021-05-28 22:58:07 - last edited 2021-05-29 20:18:36

@ATee 

 

Hey

 

It's not a problem, more than happy to help where I can! 

 

Before jumping into the questions let's start breaking down the differences you will need to know to do this.  Please excuse if you already know this stuff

 

 

Router :  Routers are basically designed to navigate between different networks, fundamentally your external ISP network (82.123.123.12 or whatever your WAN IP is) and your home network (192.168.x.x).   So fundamentally if you connect a network into the WAN port, it expects a different network to come out of the LAN ports

 

Switches are not that smart.   They look at the MAC addresses of the devices connected to each port and send data based on that, they don't care about IP addresses.  These should only be used internally on one network

 

Access Points..  Literally just convert LAN cable to wireless, basic but efficient! 

 

Ok, so questions..

 

What does it mean by giving the routers their own IP range and DHCP. What does this do for the network and what are the "cons" for not attempting this route?

 

Right.. so basically the internet is going to come into your HH3000 with a WAN address of, say 85.85.85.85

DHCP on the HH3000 will provide all your clients an address starting   192.168.1.x   this is an internal LAN address.   Anything starting 192.168 cant be used outside the router.    It will basically "route" data from the   192.168.1.x    network to the 85.85.85.85.. Hope that makes sense

Therefore when you connect the second router   C2600  it will be given an address from the HH3000, lets say  192.168.1.2      as mentioned earlier, routers move data between networks, so you will need to configure your DHCP on the C2600 to hand out a different address range from the HH3000    lets say  192.168.10.x

 

The access point won't care and will simply take the IP address from whatever router is connected to and forward it over the wireless.   There is literally no network config required. 

 

So the problem is you are now in a situation where you have a thing called Double NAT (network address translation) if you use the two routers.  NAT is basically the process of moving data from one network to another by changing the destination of it. 

 

Anything plugged into router 2 will get an address   192.168.10.x   this will then be sent to the C2600, which will route it to the 192.168.1.x network which will be picked up by the HH3000 and routed again from the 192.168.1.x  to the internet.   In short you are going through 3x networks to get online and have 2 different IP ranges.   Generally, it's best practice to avoid double NAT as it could cause a number of issues for you.

 

  • It slows things down.  NAT is one of the slowest parts of networking and while its overhead is small... it's best to NAT as little as possible. Fundamentally this can slow PINGs and increase LAG
  • Some things don't like double NAT.  You might have issues with XBox, Playstation etc as they try to detect a direct internet connection, double nat messes this sometimes.  Xbox live refers to this as NAT STRICT
  • Printers.  If your printer is on a 192.168.1.x  address and you're on a 192.168.10.x range, it can cause problems that way.  Will need to be configured appropriately.
  • If you are trying to host a game or run a server, you will need to configure forwarding twice for each router.
  • It costs more for a router than a switch or AP

 

 

used it a few times, basically just buy a router that can run in repeater mode, it will take in the signal from the HH3000 and repeat it.  Anything plugged into LAN port gets LAN access also.  Works well, no IP fiddling required and easy to setup.     Ultimately the wired backhaul will be faster overall.   

 

So this is what I'm thinking from your suggestions and this is how my setup currently works:

 

  • Main modem: HH3000 located in basement. I used an RJ45 toolless connector to re-purpose CAT5e cable (meant for phone) that are connected to my modem. There are 3 connections, Living Room, Kitchen and Bedroom
  • Primary Router: C2600 hard-wried from living room to HH3000
  • Secondary Access Point: None now, but I am super curious to the suggestions you provided.

 

Honestly.. unless you REALLY need to use the C2600 I would leave it out for the reasons above.  Plug an Access Point into that port in the living room to provide WiFi and job done.   Any device connected to the AP will be getting its address from the HH3000, no double NAT.. no secondary DHCP.. easy!

 

If you want my opinion get 2x APs and plug them into the Living Room and Kitchen, set the SSID and Password the same.. job done no mess.   Flog the C2600 on ebay or something.  That way everything is on the same  192.168.1.x  range provided by the HH3000

 

 

If I hardwire both the primary router and the secondary access point and give them the same SSIDs as the HH3000, it sounds like this would be the best "coverage" solution versus having 2 routers bounce WIFI signals off the HH3000.

 

Yes.. coverage of 2x devices will always be better than 1 device and a repeater.   Setting the same SSID and Password on each will make it easy for you, however these wont work as one network.. in that I mean device wont switchover (roam) seamlessly between them

 

If you move from basement to living room for example.. one of two things will happen.     The device will either still get a signal from the basement and stick to it until its totally dead..  or   it will lose signal from the basement, drop all connections and after a few seconds reconnect to the living room.   either way its not ideal.   Thats the advantage of a Mesh or Controller based WiFi, it will force the device to move to the other Node / AP without disconnecting it completely

 

Because my HH3000 is in the basement, I actually had the WiFi on this turned off to prevent too many wifi channels but it seems like it would be beneficial having it on potentially.

 

As long as the signals are not strong enough from the other device (less than -70db is a good basis), this isn't an issue.   Otherwise just set the devices  on 3x different channels.    1    6   11   for 2.5ghz   and      36   40    44   for 5ghz should suffice.

 

I have a slightly unrelated issue to all this where my C2600 doesn't give full speeds on 5 Ghz even beside the router or even hardwired. I was maxing out at 85mbps but after doing a factory restore it seemed to help.

 

Likely the setting for channel width, this can be 20   40  or 80mhz (or auto).  Set for 80 to get the most speed

Recommended Solution
  1  
  1  
#6
Options
7 Reply
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-25 16:45:27 - last edited 2021-05-27 02:10:47

@ATee 

 

Hey

 

If you connect the 2x routers to the HH3000 via their WAN ports (blue) you could configure the same SSID and Wireless settings on both and that might be what you are after..  However that will require you to have the 3x routers on different IP ranges.. eg

 

HH3000  -  192.168.1.x

Router 1  -  192.168.2.x

Router 2  -  192.168.3.x

 

It will work, but its messy! 

 

As you say, setting them as WDS bridge might be a better option for you, its going to require less configuring to get work and would offer a more elegent solution as all will report back to the HH3000 as the main hub.

 

In relation to your Eero..  you may find its trying to move your older devices accross to 5ghz and failing.  Try seperating the 5ghz and 2,4ghz if that is possible..   I know a few people with the Eero, they are ok.. Deco tends to be better if honest, not to bang the TP Link drum on their forums :)

 

 

  1  
  1  
#2
Options
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-25 17:53:30 - last edited 2021-05-27 02:10:47

@Philbert Thank you greatly for your in detailed reply! This definitely gives me great ideas.

 

So I have the option to connect the router to both WAN ports of 2 different routers. When configuring the SSID for both routers, how do you prevent "duplicate" SSIDs from showing up and just having "one"?

 

I have disabled the WiFi on the HH3000 but in theory it sounds like I could potentially daisychain all 3 together and have one single SSID, is that right? Would the dynamic IP ranges need to be set on each modem / router seperately?

 

To your other point with WDS bridge, I have never attempted this but have you heard anything good about it? I was thinking if I got 2 TP-link routers that supported this option, it should work fairly decently. But I wanted to avoid the issue of internet dropping if I "skipped" to another device.

 

Yeah strangely enough with the Eero there is a setting that allows 2.4ghz to connect in a 10 min time span. I had 3 different Wyze cameras that were all unable to connect even when applying the correct setting and turning off band steering.But no luck...everything I've tried has failed to work so I reverted those devices back to my C2600 and figured i should just get another router if it makes sense.

  0  
  0  
#3
Options
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-25 21:55:56 - last edited 2021-05-27 02:10:47

@ATee 

 

Hey again

 

So I have the option to connect the router to both WAN ports of 2 different routers. When configuring the SSID for both routers, how do you prevent "duplicate" SSIDs from showing up and just having "one"?

 

You cant really stop duplicates, this will happen on all multi node setups, even mesh or Omada SDN networks.   All you can do is set the SSID, Security and password the same on all the nodes and clients will move between them.  However disadvantage is that the nodes will all be independant, so it wont roam seamlessly and you will get drop out moving about.

 

I have disabled the WiFi on the HH3000 but in theory it sounds like I could potentially daisychain all 3 together and have one single SSID, is that right? Would the dynamic IP ranges need to be set on each modem / router seperately?

 

Yeah enable WiFi on all devices configured the same and technically you have 3x Access points to teh one network.  They wont roam between eachother but its good overage which is the main thing.   I would give the routers each their own IP range and DHCP, that is the easiest way to get this working.   2x WAN ports back to the main router, all on different addresses like previously mentioned.  You dont have to do this, but its easier that way in terms of DNS and routing.

 

To your other point with WDS bridge, I have never attempted this but have you heard anything good about it? I was thinking if I got 2 TP-link routers that supported this option, it should work fairly decently. But I wanted to avoid the issue of internet dropping if I "skipped" to another device.

 

used it a few times, basically just buy a router that can run in repeater mode, it will take in the signal from the HH3000 and repeat it.  Anything plugged into LAN port gets LAN access also.  Works well, no IP fiddling required and easy to setup.     Ultimately the wired backhaul will be faster overall.   

 

 

My last thoughts.. rather than messing around with routers.. buy yourself 2x TL-WA1201 Access Points and cable them into the HH3000.   The 1201 is really cheap and supports POE injection, you may find 2x of these the same price as a router and overall be a better setup for you.     These are also brand new devices with the latest and better chipsets.. thats how I would go if i was you!  Ultimately all you need is an Access Point, Routers are overkill for what you are trying to achieve

 

 

 

  1  
  1  
#4
Options
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-28 18:31:56

@Philbert I really appreciate the time you are taking to reply, really do. I'm a networking newbie so pardon my ignorance with the below questions:

 

I would give the routers each their own IP range and DHCP, that is the easiest way to get this working.   2x WAN ports back to the main router, all on different addresses like previously mentioned.  You dont have to do this, but its easier that way in terms of DNS and routing.

 

What does it mean by giving the routers their own IP range and DHCP. What does this do for the network and what are the "cons" for not attempting this route?

 

used it a few times, basically just buy a router that can run in repeater mode, it will take in the signal from the HH3000 and repeat it.  Anything plugged into LAN port gets LAN access also.  Works well, no IP fiddling required and easy to setup.     Ultimately the wired backhaul will be faster overall.   

 

So this is what I'm thinking from your suggestions and this is how my setup currently works:

 

  • Main modem: HH3000 located in basement. I used an RJ45 toolless connector to re-purpose CAT5e cable (meant for phone) that are connected to my modem. There are 3 connections, Living Room, Kitchen and Bedroom
  • Primary Router: C2600 hard-wried from living room to HH3000
  • Secondary Access Point: None now, but I am super curious to the suggestions you provided.

 

If I hardwire both the primary router and secondary access point and give them the same SSIDs as the HH3000, it sounds like this would be the best "coverage" solution versus having 2 routers bounce WIFI signals off the HH3000.

 

Because my HH3000 is in the basement, I actually had the WiFi on this turned off to prevent too many wifi channels but it seems like it would be beneficial having it on potentially.

 

I have a slightly unrelated issue to all this where my C2600 doesn't give full speeds on 5 Ghz even beside the router or even hardwired. I was maxing out at 85mbps but after doing a factory restore it seemed to help.

  0  
  0  
#5
Options
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?-Solution
2021-05-28 22:58:07 - last edited 2021-05-29 20:18:36

@ATee 

 

Hey

 

It's not a problem, more than happy to help where I can! 

 

Before jumping into the questions let's start breaking down the differences you will need to know to do this.  Please excuse if you already know this stuff

 

 

Router :  Routers are basically designed to navigate between different networks, fundamentally your external ISP network (82.123.123.12 or whatever your WAN IP is) and your home network (192.168.x.x).   So fundamentally if you connect a network into the WAN port, it expects a different network to come out of the LAN ports

 

Switches are not that smart.   They look at the MAC addresses of the devices connected to each port and send data based on that, they don't care about IP addresses.  These should only be used internally on one network

 

Access Points..  Literally just convert LAN cable to wireless, basic but efficient! 

 

Ok, so questions..

 

What does it mean by giving the routers their own IP range and DHCP. What does this do for the network and what are the "cons" for not attempting this route?

 

Right.. so basically the internet is going to come into your HH3000 with a WAN address of, say 85.85.85.85

DHCP on the HH3000 will provide all your clients an address starting   192.168.1.x   this is an internal LAN address.   Anything starting 192.168 cant be used outside the router.    It will basically "route" data from the   192.168.1.x    network to the 85.85.85.85.. Hope that makes sense

Therefore when you connect the second router   C2600  it will be given an address from the HH3000, lets say  192.168.1.2      as mentioned earlier, routers move data between networks, so you will need to configure your DHCP on the C2600 to hand out a different address range from the HH3000    lets say  192.168.10.x

 

The access point won't care and will simply take the IP address from whatever router is connected to and forward it over the wireless.   There is literally no network config required. 

 

So the problem is you are now in a situation where you have a thing called Double NAT (network address translation) if you use the two routers.  NAT is basically the process of moving data from one network to another by changing the destination of it. 

 

Anything plugged into router 2 will get an address   192.168.10.x   this will then be sent to the C2600, which will route it to the 192.168.1.x network which will be picked up by the HH3000 and routed again from the 192.168.1.x  to the internet.   In short you are going through 3x networks to get online and have 2 different IP ranges.   Generally, it's best practice to avoid double NAT as it could cause a number of issues for you.

 

  • It slows things down.  NAT is one of the slowest parts of networking and while its overhead is small... it's best to NAT as little as possible. Fundamentally this can slow PINGs and increase LAG
  • Some things don't like double NAT.  You might have issues with XBox, Playstation etc as they try to detect a direct internet connection, double nat messes this sometimes.  Xbox live refers to this as NAT STRICT
  • Printers.  If your printer is on a 192.168.1.x  address and you're on a 192.168.10.x range, it can cause problems that way.  Will need to be configured appropriately.
  • If you are trying to host a game or run a server, you will need to configure forwarding twice for each router.
  • It costs more for a router than a switch or AP

 

 

used it a few times, basically just buy a router that can run in repeater mode, it will take in the signal from the HH3000 and repeat it.  Anything plugged into LAN port gets LAN access also.  Works well, no IP fiddling required and easy to setup.     Ultimately the wired backhaul will be faster overall.   

 

So this is what I'm thinking from your suggestions and this is how my setup currently works:

 

  • Main modem: HH3000 located in basement. I used an RJ45 toolless connector to re-purpose CAT5e cable (meant for phone) that are connected to my modem. There are 3 connections, Living Room, Kitchen and Bedroom
  • Primary Router: C2600 hard-wried from living room to HH3000
  • Secondary Access Point: None now, but I am super curious to the suggestions you provided.

 

Honestly.. unless you REALLY need to use the C2600 I would leave it out for the reasons above.  Plug an Access Point into that port in the living room to provide WiFi and job done.   Any device connected to the AP will be getting its address from the HH3000, no double NAT.. no secondary DHCP.. easy!

 

If you want my opinion get 2x APs and plug them into the Living Room and Kitchen, set the SSID and Password the same.. job done no mess.   Flog the C2600 on ebay or something.  That way everything is on the same  192.168.1.x  range provided by the HH3000

 

 

If I hardwire both the primary router and the secondary access point and give them the same SSIDs as the HH3000, it sounds like this would be the best "coverage" solution versus having 2 routers bounce WIFI signals off the HH3000.

 

Yes.. coverage of 2x devices will always be better than 1 device and a repeater.   Setting the same SSID and Password on each will make it easy for you, however these wont work as one network.. in that I mean device wont switchover (roam) seamlessly between them

 

If you move from basement to living room for example.. one of two things will happen.     The device will either still get a signal from the basement and stick to it until its totally dead..  or   it will lose signal from the basement, drop all connections and after a few seconds reconnect to the living room.   either way its not ideal.   Thats the advantage of a Mesh or Controller based WiFi, it will force the device to move to the other Node / AP without disconnecting it completely

 

Because my HH3000 is in the basement, I actually had the WiFi on this turned off to prevent too many wifi channels but it seems like it would be beneficial having it on potentially.

 

As long as the signals are not strong enough from the other device (less than -70db is a good basis), this isn't an issue.   Otherwise just set the devices  on 3x different channels.    1    6   11   for 2.5ghz   and      36   40    44   for 5ghz should suffice.

 

I have a slightly unrelated issue to all this where my C2600 doesn't give full speeds on 5 Ghz even beside the router or even hardwired. I was maxing out at 85mbps but after doing a factory restore it seemed to help.

 

Likely the setting for channel width, this can be 20   40  or 80mhz (or auto).  Set for 80 to get the most speed

Recommended Solution
  1  
  1  
#6
Options
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-29 20:18:29

@Philbert 

 

You are honestly incredible, thank you so much again for such a very well written and detailed reply. It means a lot.

 

I'm going to weigh my options between two APs and a mesh system. The Eero for the life of me isn't working well with my 2.4ghz devices even when I follow all the rules to a tee to get it to scan and accept 2.4ghz devices. 

 

I was looking at the Deco M5 AC1300...it's an older model but on sale for $200 in Canada. 

 

The two access points seem like it would do a decent job. I may only need one it seems if I'm using the HH3000 as the main router in the basement and perhaps one in the bedroom to help coverage upstairs.

  0  
  0  
#7
Options
Re:2 Routers vs Mesh?
2021-05-29 22:05:14

@ATee 

 

You are most welcome mate, feel free to ask again if you need any other help

 

If you are considering Deco, look at the S4 triple pack.   I got them for €120 / 150$US  recently to do exactly what you are after for a customer.    The cheaper double pack (€80) might be enough for you.  I set these up and ran them in Access Point mode using a cat5 backhaul between them, all worked perfectly!

 

 

 

  0  
  0  
#8
Options

Information

Helpful: 0

Views: 889

Replies: 7

Related Articles