Double Router Arrangement Worthwhile?

[jim]

I'm currently using a 'family router', whereby I don't really have any sort of access to it, and resources are shared between all computers over the one network, with WEP "protection"

However, I'm planning to scale up my personal network a bit, hopefully by the end of this year having a wired server and main desktop, and wireless htpc, laptop, printer and PS3 all networked. However, I'm not sure I fancy the idea of other people in the house printing with my ink, pulling files off my server and so on, so I was considering getting a second router to replace the 4 port switch (attached to the main router) that I currently use. That would be primarily so that I could isolate my network from the main household one (which I don't use), use WPA rather than WEP, and still use our sole phone line.

I was imagining that I could probably get the second router's packets forwarded directly to the internet to avoid compatibility problems with double-firewalling and so on, and use 192.168.1.x instead of 192.168.0.x to make two completely separate networks. Presumably if I get the router to treat the other computers as an internet entity it would prevent them from gaining access to my separate network?

Is that a sensible idea, or do you reckon it will probably end in disaster? Also, considering I would be doing large file transfers from desktop to server and vice-versa, would Gigabit Ethernet be worthwhile, and what kind of routers are worth considering?

Sorry for all of the questions, as you can see I'm not really that familiar with networking yet

[jamin]

I'm not sure that you understand fully what you want. If you want to restrict access to network resources then restrict access to them by username IP or mac via the OS. Trying to segment your network in the manner you mention will require a lot of unecessary config that in all reality won't achieve your goals. Double firewalling won't do what you want mate and will be a pain in the ass.

If you feel gbe is the way for you to go then go for it, but loads of us still use 100mb ethernet and are happy with it.

[ma10]

using a 2nd router between the family router to seperate your own "private" network can be done (and seems to be the easiest solution) but the double NAT being done by your 2nd router will cause your internet access to be slow and potentially not work for various apps too....

if you were keen on Gbe switch then you could possible try to find a relatively cheap-ish smart switch which has a WAN port or allows you to setup vlans to each port.

or, the more techy solution (and possibly expensive) you could stick a (old) computer in between the family router and your switch using it as a dedicated firewall.... e.g. using firewall software like m0n0, pfsense, smoothwall...

[dave87]

Try something like a WGPS606 and a GbE Switch, then use the OS to restrict access.

[DR]

I'm currently using a 'family router', whereby I don't really have any sort of access to it, and resources are shared between all computers over the one network, with WEP "protection"

However, I'm planning to scale up my personal network a bit, hopefully by the end of this year having a wired server and main desktop, and wireless htpc, laptop, printer and PS3 all networked. However, I'm not sure I fancy the idea of other people in the house printing with my ink, pulling files off my server and so on, so I was considering getting a second router to replace the 4 port switch (attached to the main router) that I currently use. That would be primarily so that I could isolate my network from the main household one (which I don't use), use WPA rather than WEP, and still use our sole phone line.

I was imagining that I could probably get the second router's packets forwarded directly to the internet to avoid compatibility problems with double-firewalling and so on, and use 192.168.1.x instead of 192.168.0.x to make two completely separate networks. Presumably if I get the router to treat the other computers as an internet entity it would prevent them from gaining access to my separate network?

Is that a sensible idea, or do you reckon it will probably end in disaster? Also, considering I would be doing large file transfers from desktop to server and vice-versa, would Gigabit Ethernet be worthwhile, and what kind of routers are worth considering?

Sorry for all of the questions, as you can see I'm not really that familiar with networking yet

Sounds like you are over complicating things - why don't you simply password your server - it's another point of failure which you will put in to your network.

Also - if you can't trust your family - why not delete your porn collection?

[richw]

I'm not a 100% if this would work how you want it, but:

Have two ip address ranges (like 192.168.0.x & 192.168.1.x)

The router can be on either address ranges, set the subnet mask to 255.255.0.0 (this will allow it to be accessed via either address range). Use the subnet 255.255.255.0 for the pc/server/ps3/printer/etc etc

Windows PC's only normally see computers within the IP address range its assigned (if the PC has the address 192.168.1.5 it will see all the computers in 192.168.1.x range).

If you want a cheap option for replacing the router then look at sky router's on ebay, there are a lot of netgear DG834GT's that can be flashed with non sky firmware (like dgteam) and work a treat providing a solid router with WPA for under £20

Gigabit can make a difference depending on what your moving around - a 100mb network can move around 650mb in about a minute.

[Georgy291]

All i can say is, just avoid wireless networks in the house completely.

im my self using a double router arrangement in my house and one of the routers does have a wireless thingy

i got 8 computers in my house so i need the two routers

but i got to say the wireless option really sucks, the wireless router is only a thin wall away and im already getting so much glitching out of it when i play games

[manwithnoname]

...
i got 8 computers in my house so i need the two routers

...

I'm no network expert but I'm sure you don't need a two routers just because you have 8 computers (their could be other reasons why you need two routers). If a router does not have enough ports you can plug a switch into the router to provide more ports.

[jamin]

All i can say is, just avoid wireless networks in the house completely.

im my self using a double router arrangement in my house and one of the routers does have a wireless thingy

i got 8 computers in my house so i need the two routers

but i got to say the wireless option really sucks, the wireless router is only a thin wall away and im already getting so much glitching out of it when i play games

I think maybe your problem may not be the wireless mate. What BB do you have? Are the other comps downloading at the same time? etc etc.... Many many users are happy with wireless, me being one of them. But I understand its limitations. Have you tried to diagnose your glitching using ping/tracert/pathping?

And just because you have 8 comps doesn't mean you need 2 routers, just a router and a switch would do the job far better/easier!

[blueball]

Why not put your router in a DMZ from the family router so it is "open" to the internet and then does its own firewalling

[jim]

I'm not sure that you understand fully what you want. If you want to restrict access to network resources then restrict access to them by username IP or mac via the OS. Trying to segment your network in the manner you mention will require a lot of unecessary config that in all reality won't achieve your goals. Double firewalling won't do what you want mate and will be a pain in the ass.

If you feel gbe is the way for you to go then go for it, but loads of us still use 100mb ethernet and are happy with it.

Yeah it's the double firewalling that worries me a bit, but putting it into a DMZ as blueball suggested might just do the trick. I was intending to go down the password route originally, but my printer just doesn't seem to have any password capability, having looked through all of its configuration pages, and it would be nice if I could still use multiple user accounts to access the resources on my own computers.

Seeing as I'll be making large transfers between my main desktop and the server, I'll probably go for gigabit ethernet... the DIR-655 sounds like it will do the trick, with the Netgear 854T getting some pretty scathing reviews on netgear's forums.

Thanks for everybody's advice, it's really appreciated

[Georgy291]

LOL i know my BB is **** i got tiscali and i desiparetly want to get rid off them, the other reason i got 2 routers is because i have 2 pcs in my room and i use the second one only as a switch so that i dont have to take 2 cables to my room from the main router.

As for the wireless

ME and my brother are on or house LAN (BB doesnt matter here) he conects to the router wired, i connect wirelessly and the game is so glitchy,

where as i turn off my wireless adapter and use the ethernet wire no glitch

btw we might have some confusion here over my set up

(internet)----->wireless router (2 pcs conected wiredly) -----wire-------->old router used as switch another 2 pcs
the rest are all browsing only so wireless

[icanhazburger]

I'm sure your mum does not like you using all her tin foil to make hats to protect yourself from your families mind ray machines either

Sounds like quite a lot of paranoia and hassle simply for a home network, just use windows security like others have suggest.

[Georgy291]

no as far as im aware off no tin foils are used for the hats

and also i dont think my walls are protected by lead either, so thats joke is out to

[3xH]

Why don't you just replace the main router with something better? Or buy a wireless access point that does WPA and disable the Wireless on the main router?

I'm sure once you explain that anyone with a laptop can break into your network within 5 mins (This is not an exaggeration, I have done it myself) when only WEP encryption is used they will be pretty quick to want to change it.

You may find the existing router does WPA or WPA2 already anyway.

To separate your part of the network properly if you want to leave the main part of the network alone the best way would be to buy a proper firewall that can run in transparent mode and firewall out the other things on your network that you dont want people to access. You can even get them with wireless if you really need it.

Something like a FortiWifi unit would do this quite nicely if you have the cash

Then there is always the windows firewall on the individual PC's.

What you don't want to do is double-nat like people have said above. It will just cause you headaches especially if you don't really know enough about networking to know what is happening.

[latrosicarius]

use one router and a switch. The router can be 100mbps. Let the switch be 1gbps. If you really want to use wireless, you can use a access point. Or if you don't have one, turn off DHCP and NAT on a wireless router and use it as a switch (e.g. dont plug anything into the WAN port)

Unless you actually have two separate ISPs, there are very few situations where using two routers is a good idea. Double-firewalling / double-NATing can only hurt your speed and prevent things from working. It will not help at all, or make your network more secure in any way shape or form.