Question 2 routers, dhcp on/off?

[zorionten]

I have 2 routers in my lan.. [Main- direct Internet connection, 100 mbps, Secondary-150 mbps]
I was using em hooked up to lan ports and secondary router's DHCP server disabled...
Then I created 2 different LANs by connecting Main router's lan port to secondary router's WAN port and enabling dhcp in both.

Does either method have any significant advantage in terms of transfer speeds or latency?

Usage is mostly gaming, video streaming... also a local file server [smb on manjaro]

 

[jeremyj_83]

That is an odd setup. What are your routers?

 

[zorionten]

That is an odd setup. What are your routers?

Main router is an old dlink router [dir 600m I think] (it takes 5 minutes to boot -_-)
and the Secondary is a Tenda N310

what would be the "normal" approach?

 

[jeremyj_83]

In Enterprise environments you would have your 2 routers/firewalls with 2 internet connections coming in to each router and the connections made into a gateway group. The group works out that if the primary connection goes down it automatically switches over to the secondary, you might have 5-10 seconds where the connection lags. Then both routers go into your switch so if either router goes down it automatically switches over to the secondary. Both of the routers have a single LAN and you separate different environments with VLANS. Both routers also could have DHCP enabled on them if you don't have a separate DHCP controller (might be a Linux box or your AD server).

Otherwise in home networks typically you have just one internet connection coming in and a single router/firewall.

 

[AllanGH]

Chaining routers is doable; but you need to assign distinctly different subnets and DHCP pools to each router.

The primary detriment to doing this is slightly increased latency on the second-level router subnet access.

I actually do this on my home network to partition network types from each other, and used to statically-assign IP addys, but moved over to leaving the modem/gateway/router on 192.168.x.x, with DHCP unmanaged and WiFi disabled. Two routers are switch connected to Port 1 on this router, each secondary level router managing different 10-dot subnets DHCP pools.

The advantage to this is that it puts my computer directly connected to the modem/gateway/router. which gives me a bit more bandwidth for .iso uploads to my web server.

It works fine.

 

[zorionten]

Chaining routers is doable; but you need to assign distinctly different subnets and DHCP pools to each router.

The primary detriment to doing this is slightly increased latency on the second-level router subnet access.

I actually do this on my home network to partition network types from each other, and used to statically-assign IP addys, but moved over to leaving the modem/gateway/router on 192.168.x.x, with DHCP unmanaged and WiFi disabled. Two routers are switch connected to Port 1 on this router, each secondary level router managing different 10-dot subnets DHCP pools.

The advantage to this is that it puts my computer directly connected to the modem/gateway/router. which gives me a bit more bandwidth for .iso uploads to my web server.

It works fine.

So A single network with 2 routers and 2 different networks doesn't make much of a difference in terms of latency?

in that case I'll keep my current 2 LAN network... My devices still stay connected in case the Main router reboots.

I have my routers set at 192.168.0.1 and 193.168.0.1 respectively

 

[AllanGH]

It makes a difference but, you're talking one hop of an additional 1mS or so. Not significant.

 

[zorionten]

It makes a difference but, you're talking one hop of an additional 1mS or so. Not significant.

Arright then... current setup is fine... thanks

 

[AllanGH]

Yup.