Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem?

Discussion in 'DIY PC' started by John Doe, Aug 3, 2013.

  1. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem?
    Maybe this will be obvious when window shopping, but... My
    neighbor has a DSL modem and wants to share the connection with
    other people. Can we just stick a wireless router in front of the
    DSL modem? Or will the addition of a wireless router require a
    call to the Internet Service Provider?

    Recommendations for a popular and inexpensive wireless router
    would be appreciated.

    I've used a wireless router before, but it included a DSL modem,
    so the setup might have required some sort of cooperation with the
    Internet Service Provider.

    Thanks.
     
    John Doe, Aug 3, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem?
    > Maybe this will be obvious when window shopping, but... My
    > neighbor has a DSL modem and wants to share the connection with
    > other people. Can we just stick a wireless router in front of the
    > DSL modem? Or will the addition of a wireless router require a
    > call to the Internet Service Provider?
    >
    > Recommendations for a popular and inexpensive wireless router
    > would be appreciated.
    >
    > I've used a wireless router before, but it included a DSL modem,
    > so the setup might have required some sort of cooperation with the
    > Internet Service Provider.
    >
    > Thanks.


    My ISP doesn't require me to tell them anything.

    The ADSL modem is not "MAC locked", like a cable modem.
    So you should be free to do what you want there.

    You can stick a wireless router after the ADSL modem/router
    if you want. Just put the ADSL modem/router in bridged mode,
    and enter a VPI:VCI if that field is required. The wireless
    router you connect to the modem, will then automatically
    take care of the details on that side of the interface.

    ADSL modem/router --------- wireless router ------------------------ wireless
    (run in bridged mode) (Stores ADSL username/password) computers
    (use a separate subnet) (Click "connect" button to start ADSL)

    All you will need to run the ADSL modem, is the username/password
    used for the PPPOE session protocol. The new wireless router,
    should have a button you click, to start an ADSL session, and
    you can enter the details in the wireless router, so it'll remember
    the username/password and send it each time. You'll still need
    to remember the username/password which allows you into the
    web interface on the wireless router.

    First, you plug a computer into the left-most box, and
    set it for bridged mode. You can push the "reset" button
    to wipe out the settings. Just make sure you know what
    you're doing, before changing it.

    Once the left-most box is set up, and on a separate subnet
    (192.168.x.1), you can then plug a wire into the center box
    and set if you. Enter SSID, WEP or WPA, but also store the
    ADSL username/password. You'll also want to change the password
    on the wireless router itself, to make it harder to hack.

    Once the center box is programmed, unplug the wire, and attempt
    to connect wirelessly.

    You can enter http://192.168.y.1 wirelessly, and try to reach
    the web interface on the center box. Click the button to start
    the ADSL, and you should then be able to surf.

    *******

    Sort the wireless routers on newegg according to review rating,
    and that should give you some idea what to buy. The latest thing
    is 802.11ac (marketing says it is faster than 802.11n). My ADSL is
    bad enough, that 802.11g would be good enough.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/802.11ac

    As for performance on wireless boxes, you can get
    some test results here.

    http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-charts/view

    Paul
     
    Paul, Aug 3, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem?
    > Maybe this will be obvious when window shopping, but... My
    > neighbor has a DSL modem and wants to share the connection with
    > other people. Can we just stick a wireless router in front of the
    > DSL modem? Or will the addition of a wireless router require a
    > call to the Internet Service Provider?
    >
    > Recommendations for a popular and inexpensive wireless router
    > would be appreciated.
    >
    > I've used a wireless router before, but it included a DSL modem,
    > so the setup might have required some sort of cooperation with the
    > Internet Service Provider.
    >
    > Thanks.


    Some other considerations for wireless routers.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57596851-83/wi-fi-routers-more-security-risks-than-ever/

    Gotta keep the riff-raff out of your 'net.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Aug 4, 2013
    #3
  4. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    Paul <nospam needed.com> wrote:

    > John Doe wrote:


    >> Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem


    > Some other considerations for wireless routers.
    >
    > http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57596851-83/wi-fi-routers-more-s
    > ecurity-risks-than-ever/
    >
    > Gotta keep the riff-raff out of your 'net.


    They have to get through your password to do anything, right?

    --






    >
    > Paul
     
    John Doe, Aug 4, 2013
    #4
  5. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > Paul <nospam needed.com> wrote:
    >
    >> John Doe wrote:

    >
    >>> Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem

    >
    >> Some other considerations for wireless routers.
    >>
    >> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57596851-83/wi-fi-routers-more-s
    >> ecurity-risks-than-ever/
    >>
    >> Gotta keep the riff-raff out of your 'net.

    >
    > They have to get through your password to do anything, right?
    >


    You can try "decoding" their other article. This is not
    exactly written like a primer, so it's hard to follow
    the mechanism in each case.

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57579981-83/top-wi-fi-routers-easy-to-hack-says-study/

    I'm not surprised that some of the router makers, didn't
    respond to the security bulletins. I've seen products,
    where firmware updates are dribbled out for years, to
    little lasting effect (the firmware becomes more
    bloated, and hardly any more functional than the
    first release). So asking some of them for
    security patches, you're lucky if they can make
    a version that continues to work. My first router
    (at $300), was like that, a dreadful exercise in
    bad firmware. Thank God it finally died from a
    hardware failure. The $40 router that replaced it,
    is miles ahead. I've never had to flash the $40 router,
    as it "just works". The $300 router, some days you'd have
    to power cycle it two or three times - it would hang.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Aug 4, 2013
    #5
  6. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    Paul wrote:
    > John Doe wrote:
    >> Paul <nospam needed.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>> John Doe wrote:

    >>
    >>>> Wireless router simply connects to DSL modem

    >>
    >>> Some other considerations for wireless routers.
    >>>
    >>> http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57596851-83/wi-fi-routers-more-s
    >>> ecurity-risks-than-ever/
    >>> Gotta keep the riff-raff out of your 'net.

    >>
    >> They have to get through your password to do anything, right?
    >>

    >
    > You can try "decoding" their other article. This is not
    > exactly written like a primer, so it's hard to follow
    > the mechanism in each case.
    >
    > http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57579981-83/top-wi-fi-routers-easy-to-hack-says-study/
    >


    This article described one of the methods in more detail.
    It's called CSRF (cross-site request forgery), and is done
    from the LAN side, just by surfing a web site with the appropriate
    attack code. So the browser on the LAN-side computer, sends LAN side
    packets to the router or modem. That's the attack vector. The web
    page code, tells the browser what to do.

    http://www.darkreading.com/vulnerability/popular-home-dsl-routers-at-risk-of-csrf/212201777

    Paul
     
    Paul, Aug 4, 2013
    #6
  7. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    I ordered a Cisco-Linksys WRT54GL. It's inexpensive, and I liked the
    fact that you can (if needed) boost the broadcast signal with custom
    firmware. I was reading about boosting the signal. Somebody said it
    doesn't do any good if the connected devices aren't powerful enough.
    That made sense, but then somewhere else somebody else pointed out
    that connected devices don't need to be powerful since uploads are
    much slower. That makes perfect sense, connected devices need not be
    powerful, considering the fact that smartphones are connected to
    wireless towers perhaps thousands of feet away.
     
    John Doe, Aug 5, 2013
    #7
  8. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > I ordered a Cisco-Linksys WRT54GL. It's inexpensive, and I liked the
    > fact that you can (if needed) boost the broadcast signal with custom
    > firmware. I was reading about boosting the signal. Somebody said it
    > doesn't do any good if the connected devices aren't powerful enough.
    > That made sense, but then somewhere else somebody else pointed out
    > that connected devices don't need to be powerful since uploads are
    > much slower. That makes perfect sense, connected devices need not be
    > powerful, considering the fact that smartphones are connected to
    > wireless towers perhaps thousands of feet away.


    The antenna radiation pattern is three-dimensional.

    The antenna the router comes with, attempts to radiate in
    all directions, for best coverage. It makes fewest assumptions
    about the layout of the computers.

    An 802.11N router, may have several antennas, for spatial redundancy.
    If one antenna path isn't optimal, the next one may work out better.
    That may also help with multipath issues. (One antenna has a multipath
    problem, while the other one is OK.)

    *******

    If you use a directional antenna, the power doesn't go in all
    directions. In this example, the "front" and the "back" of the
    antenna, gets most of the power. And in the Z-axis, you can see
    there is still reasonably good output above and below the
    horizon. If you were positioned vertically over top of
    this antenna, you'd get zero signal.

    http://www.antenna-theory.com/antennas/travelling/yagi6.jpg

    Many times, they show you only the X-Y plane, and don't bother
    explaining what happens in Z. At least this is a bit easier
    to visualize in some ways. I know I want the receiver sitting
    at 12 o'clock to this diagram.

    http://www.antenna-theory.com/antennas/travelling/yagi5.jpg

    You have to think about those patterns, before putting
    directional antennas on everything.

    And the Z axis, has an impact on antenna siting as well.
    If you're doing wifi for the neighborhood, you'd think
    putting the antenna "up high" is good. This is true, if
    there are obstructions in the way. But if you look at the
    Z-axis pattern, you'll be losing something because all
    clients are below the horizon of the antenna. You could
    tilt the antenna, but that only works, if all the users
    are on one side of the 360 degree circle.

    The free tool 4nec2 can make those diagrams. I used that
    for my antenna project (to verify someone else's design).
    For example, if you were contemplating a "Pringles Antenna",
    see if you can get a NEC file for the design. Just to see
    how it works. And what the pattern looks like.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerical_Electromagnetics_Code

    http://www.qsl.net/4nec2/

    *******

    So we know that Linksys doesn't necessarily respond to all
    security bulletins. (Based on the links I previously posted.)
    That's a negative, if actually true.

    WRT54GL - Broadcom BCM5352 @ 200 MHz <--- System On Chip running Linux

    "Linksys released the WRT54GL in 2005 to support third-party
    firmware based on Linux, after the original WRT54G line was
    switched from Linux to VxWorks, starting with version 5.
    The WRT54GL is technically a reissue of the version 4 WRT54G."

    "Fully supported by Tomato, OpenWrt, and DD-WRT."

    That means, it's actually a Linux computer inside, with limited
    Flash storage space and RAM. The amount of Flash and RAM determines
    what third party code it can run. If further researches indicated
    the unit had some security problems, you have the option of
    re-flashing it.

    In cases where the users of this router, are having problems
    exhausting the connection table when Torrenting, you can look
    at those third-party flashes as a solution. Assuming there
    isn't a hardware limit preventing a performance improvement.
    One of the torrent help sites, had a table showing
    some of the connection table limits for popular routers.
    The list was not exhaustive, and was probably done by
    one person's testing.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Aug 5, 2013
    #8
  9. John Doe

    John Doe Guest

    What I find amazing is that smartphones can communicate with towers
    that are thousands of feet away.
     
    John Doe, Aug 5, 2013
    #9
  10. John Doe

    Paul Guest

    John Doe wrote:
    > What I find amazing is that smartphones can communicate with towers
    > that are thousands of feet away.


    Wifi can go a long distance too. I've read several stories like
    the following one, where Wifi is tested in the mountains.
    In this case, they manage 237 miles. I think a modification
    to the timeout on the protocol is required, for things
    like this to work (as the Wifi was probably not design
    with that kind of propagation distance in mind).

    http://www.engadget.com/2007/06/19/venezuelans-set-new-wifi-distance-record-237-miles/

    GSM is 22 miles for a tower, lesser distances for the
    lower forms of transmitters (like femtocells). The power
    on the cellphone, is 2 watts at 900MHz.

    This is a description for Wifi...

    "FCC rules require EIRP to be 1 watt or less.

    For example, you can set the transmit power in an 802.11b
    access point or client to its highest level (generally 100 milliwatts)
    and use a typical 3 dB omni-directional antenna. This combination
    results in only 200 milliwatts EIRP, which is well within FCC
    regulations."

    So we can see a couple differences. In the Wifi/router
    case, there is no tower (good elevation). The Wifi transmitter
    starts with a lower power. The default antenna has low gain,
    leaving some margin to the FCC (unlicensed) limit.

    I agree with you though, cell reception is nothing short of
    amazing, when you compare it to other forms of communications.
    Maybe it's because the antennas are everywhere.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Aug 5, 2013
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. codeblue
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    440
    Lordy
    Sep 23, 2004
  2. Lee
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    261
  3. Bill Anderson

    Wireless Router and DSL

    Bill Anderson, Sep 14, 2007, in forum: DIY PC
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    240
    Ed Cregger
    Sep 15, 2007
  4. johns
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    230
    johns
    Feb 21, 2010
  5. John Doe
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    276
    Mike Easter
    Aug 8, 2012
Loading...

Share This Page