Connection of HG 612 modem to router

[#1]

Hi
I have a very stable connection with the modem connected directly to my TP Link router. But the position of the router is less than ideal for its wireless signal.
Due to access and wiring constraints I can place the router in a better position but only connect it to the modem via switches on the internal LAN. Could this be an issue or should it work as though it is connected directly to each other.?
Thanks

[#2]

Quote from: vimesuk

connect it to the modem via switches on the internal LAN. Could this be an issue or should it work as though it is connected directly to each other.?

I don't think it will work but I could be wrong. However why do you need a switch in the way? Just get a longer cable connecting the modem to the router. The only cable length limit between your modem and router is the limit of Ethernet cable and that's a hundred metres for Cat5 and several hundred metres for Cat6.
It won't affect your connection speed because that's all done and dusted once the modem has done its thing.

[#3]

Thanks for the reply.
The reason for the switch being needed is not so much complex but more of you would have to see the layout to appreciate the CAT5E which is connected from the router in the hall is being passed under the laminated flooring and then through a wall to the front room - then to my main PC. That is sort of fixed in placed and could be extended by a switch so that the newly positioned router could be placed more central in the house.
I am not sure if the modem and router need a direct connection or will work with switches involved over a home LAN.

[#4]

You could *try* something called sheath sharing.
Figure out which 2 pairs are used by the PPPoE from the modem to the router, and which 2 would be needed for 10/100 ethernet, and put them down the same 4 pair cable.
What I've done however is something similar to what you wanted.
I had the NTE5 in the hall, with the modem and router next to it. Wall-warts & cables as far as the eye could see.
I actually put in a cat5 extension lead (under the floor) from the back of the DSL faceplate, and moved both boxes to a central location. I then moved all of the other cat5 cables I had (using punchdown junction boxes) so they all appear in the same place.
I've not lost any signal integrity (speeds are as good, if not better than with the standard faceplate to modem lead), plus I've now got the router in a better place, with the modem next to it. Both out of sight, with my NAS, plus a 10/100 switch allowing me to connect the 2nd port of my 612 into the network, so I can monitor the DSL performance.
The only slight downside is that CAT5 cable isn't designed to go into an FCC68 2/6 connector (the one that goes into the DSL port on the modem), so it's a little ugly. To keep costs down, I didn't add a patch panel, I just put RJ45s on the ends of all of the leads, and plug them directly into the router.
HTH.
Pete.
mav:quote

[#5]

The WAN side of the router has to be directly connected to modem. That establishes the PPP connection and gives the connections on LAN ports (and on WiFi). Yes you could use Ethernet switches to connect the modem to the router, but because that is on the WAN side, you wouldn't be able to connect anything else to the switches as they'd have no connectivity.

[#6]

Thanks for both of the replies - I kinda guessed that what I simply wrote might not be as simple to resolve.
Overall in my situation I'm just going to run some more CAT5E cable from where the modem is to where I want the router to be. I had hoped that the switch solution, whilst not the most elegant, would give me chances to try the router where the signal strength from the unit is the prime consideration and not tha tof the connection to the modem.
I have already got the upstairs (two more floors) covered by a wired TP-Link Action Point and it works well.
Again thanks to you both - it has saved me a lot of hassle trying to get something to work which isn't going to by just connecting to the switch as noted. Although when I chatted to Plusnet, live chat, I was told that it would work but port forwarding could be needed by the router.

[#7]

There is an alternative - leave the router where it is, have a switch by your PC and then get a wireless access point which you connect to the switch. Even better is, if you have an old ADSL wireless router you should be able to reconfigure it to do all that you need in one box by disabling the ADSL side of it and disabling the DHCP - that turns it in to a wireless multi-port switch.

[#8]

That is a good point.
I have bought a second hand version of the Netgear Nighthawk R7000 router and it should be with me early this week. With that I could then use my TP-Link TL-WDR4900 v1 router (not the action point upstairs) and do as you suggest - use it as an AP by disabling DHCP - I'll have to look into that as it is using OpenWRT and I'm not too familiar with the layout as yet..... although it is stable...!



Seems doable....
https://wiki.openwrt.org/doc/recipes/dumbap
thanks for the idea.

[#9]

Quote from: spoon

There is an alternative - leave the router where it is, have a switch by your PC and then get a wireless access point

D'oh! I should have thought of that. It's exactly what I did for exactly the same reasons as the OP. I think I use a Netgear WAP but it obviously works so well that I've completely forgotten about it