The questions come as I go so I didn't know half the questions when I made it. Titlewise it is useless but I did it so that I wouldn't have made 10 other topics on the forum. Besides, can't people do post searches? If they do that then what the title is should be irrelevant. I also have this bookmarked.
@jmw1950 wrote:
As long as the wireless routers all operate on different channels, there should be no co-existence problems. Potentially there will be more bandwidth available to the network. Depending upon whether the WiFi device the router is talking to is running 802.11b or 802.11g you may have more bandwidth available to the router than any individual Wi-Fi channel can use. Obviously more units will allow you cover more space, and it will probably allow more connections since most low cost wireless access points don't support a lot of simultaneous wireless connections .
You also want to make sure the wireless access points/routers are physically separated so that they don't interfere with each due to signal overload.
Users will see multiple wireless networks, one from each wireless accesspoint/router if they can get a satisfactory signal from them.
Just to confirm, you're saying more wireless routers means more overall bandwidth? I don't think it should increase it, since if someone is using the same wireless connection and he's downloading massive files, regardless if I'm using another router my connection still should get affected by his activity. If this is wrong, let me know please.
@tsauter wrote:
@Avenger wrote:
Ok, so the NAT is not like something that gets crowded up and slows down connections? I'm not sure why I always hear p2p sharing and counter strike when NAT is brought up. I know they work it hard but I think general surfing and loading/downloading kinda uses it up as well.
Not sure why someone brought up DNS.
And this is probably a dumb question but if you read tsk's post on the previous page, I was wondering after doing those steps he listed, which router's NAT would be in use, the primary router or the secondary one? I think it's the secondary but I wanted to be sure.
NAT stands for network address translation. It is the only way that your private address (192.168.x.x) can talk to the internet. In order to talk on the interent you have to have a public address. The NAT table allows the data to repackaged with a public IP address so it can be routed on the internet. Generally speaking P2P is affected by NAT because the addresses used constantly rotate depending on what is availible when the data comes through the router. Public addresses are expensive and most companys only ay for the minimum nedded for the network to function. NAT allows a netework of a 100's or 1000's of computer to use the same handfull of public addresses.
In the setup that TSK lines out, the actiontec router would be doing the NATing.
So, how can I make my secondary router do the NATing, because the whole purpose a year or two ago I did that was to disable the NATing of the actiontec router, which I heard blows.
