Connecting Two Local Networks through WAN Routers, Possible?

[lockhrt999]

Hello Folks,

As you can see above I have two networks (A & B. Right now they receive separate internet connections. I'd like to connect them so that I can share internet connection (and possibly files too) from point A to point B. The need of doing so because I can't afford two separate connections.

I have two ADSL routers lying around (from earlier connections) and also happen to have a WAN cable long enough to reach both points. These ADSL routers are very generic routers provided by my earlier ISP for the broadband and both are identical. They do support basic routing functionality such as bridge mode, DHCP etc. Generally in ADSL routers one of the cable is connected to the ISP server and that's how it gets the net.

I have following questions,

1. My theory is, in bridge mode (ie non-adsl/PPPoE) these two routers can connect each other for communication (As shown in the picture). Of Course, I will disable DHCP and put them on static IP mode for the peace of mind. This is just my theory, I need to know if this works. It could also be like, these routers become useless pieces of junk without an ISP server controlling them, in which case my theory is wrong.

2. What kind of throughput can I expect at point B. I know for sure these routers don't have problem supporting broadband speeds up to 4 mbps. I know sharing of files won't be as fast as it would be on LAN but it's not a priority for me.

3. Do I need to configure these routers in special way so that files could also be shared? Because, I think if I put them on bridge mode they will let all kinds of protocols to pass through .

4. If you think it won't work in bridge mode & some other configuration is needed, then what's that?

Thanks.

 

[USAFRet]

If you want this to be all one network with one outside connection, I'm not seeing the need for the two ADSL routers and the two 'splitters'.
Just plug a 100m Cat5e into router A, and connect it to router B. Router B having DHCP off, and just acting as an access point.

Also, if this is 100 meters, presumably some or all of it is outside? Be sure to get outdoor rated cable.

 

[bill001g]

You can not connect dsl routers back to back on their wan ports. These device can not talk to each other directly there is a device called a dslam in the telco office that is required to be between them. As suggested above just connect router a and router b and us router b as a AP.

 

[lockhrt999]

Thanks for your reply guys and sorry for late reply as the notification went into spam.

If you want this to be all one network with one outside connection, I'm not seeing the need for the two ADSL routers and the two 'splitters'.
Just plug a 100m Cat5e into router A, and connect it to router B. Router B having DHCP off, and just acting as an access point.

Also, if this is 100 meters, presumably some or all of it is outside? Be sure to get outdoor rated cable.

I want to use routers and wan cable because it's already present. I don't know the exact distance, it could be more than 100m. Won't the cat 5 need a repeater for such a long distance? I can't arrange a repeater.

Simply put I want to transfer some internet bandwidth over WAN cable (a pair of copper wires) which is already laid out. I thought I could use routers as muxer and demuxer.

What do people do when they want to connect two points with a private network but don't own an ISP company?

 

[lockhrt999]

You can not connect dsl routers back to back on their wan ports. These device can not talk to each other directly there is a device called a dslam in the telco office that is required to be between them. As suggested above just connect router a and router b and us router b as a AP.

Ok if not adsl modem, what about simple cable modems (who use http based authentication) Do they also work on same principle?

 

[USAFRet]

You can not connect dsl routers back to back on their wan ports. These device can not talk to each other directly there is a device called a dslam in the telco office that is required to be between them. As suggested above just connect router a and router b and us router b as a AP.

Ok if not adsl modem, what about simple cable modems (who use http based authentication) Do they also work on same principle?

I'm still not seeing the need for the other devices between router A and router B.

 

[lockhrt999]

You can not connect dsl routers back to back on their wan ports. These device can not talk to each other directly there is a device called a dslam in the telco office that is required to be between them. As suggested above just connect router a and router b and us router b as a AP.

Ok if not adsl modem, what about simple cable modems (who use http based authentication) Do they also work on same principle?

I'm still not seeing the need for the other devices between router A and router B.

If I'm to use CAT 5 e solution and if the distance is more than 100 meters, won't it need a repeater? I can't use repeater because I don't own area in that 100m.

 

[USAFRet]

Well, yes. If the distance between A and B is greater than 100 meters, you will need something in the middle.

How far are we talking about?

 

[lockhrt999]

Well, yes. If the distance between A and B is greater than 100 meters, you will need something in the middle.

How far are we talking about?

Don't know exact but definitely more than a 100 meters.

 

[USAFRet]

So...more than 100m. What is in between? Open space? Land that you control? Other buildings?

 

[lockhrt999]

So...more than 100m. What is in between? Open space? Land that you control? Other buildings?

Other houses and roads. It's fine to lay out the wire but not ok to have a device hooked up in the middle.
Are you asking if I have clear line of sight? I don't have it.

 

[USAFRet]

Well...if it is more than 100meters, and you can't have a device in the middle somewhere, and you don't have line of sight....you may be out of luck.

There are various long range wifi solutions that may work.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA1V00S64887

http://www.countrymilewifi.com/how-to-set-a-bridge.aspx

http://www.radiolabs.com/products/antennas/long-range-wifi-antenna.html

 

[lockhrt999]

hmm. ok.
A stupid question don't laugh please, 😀
What if I poke one end of a copper wire (from WAN cable) into antenna slot of the wifi router from point A and do the same on the opposite side? Will both routers able to see each other?

Routers from both ends have 2x 5 db antennas and support 300mbps wireless bandwidth each. I know WAN cable isn't coaxial but still even if I can get 1/100th of that bandwidth, it'll work for me.

 

[USAFRet]

No, and you might cause the magic smoke to be released.

 

[bill001g]

You need clear line of sight to use wireless. To do that use outdoor direction wireless bridge units on both ends and connect them to the 2 routers ethernet ports. Normal routers will not connect to each other via wireless they must have a bridge ability. Again you must have clear line of sight. engenius enh202 is one example

The solutions get very expensive very quickly when you have more than 100m. I doubt you can just lay cable on top of the ground on property you do not own. It would not last too long if you ran it across roads.

The common solution when you need more than 100m is to run fiber optic cables. There are other solution that let you use copper wire doing stuff like running your own DSL over it but the device you connect to the wire cost a real lot...fiber is expensive but it is still cheaper than the other options.

 

[lockhrt999]

You need clear line of sight to use wireless. To do that use outdoor direction wireless bridge units on both ends and connect them to the 2 routers ethernet ports. Normal routers will not connect to each other via wireless they must have a bridge ability. Again you must have clear line of sight. engenius enh202 is one example

The solutions get very expensive very quickly when you have more than 100m. I doubt you can just lay cable on top of the ground on property you do not own. It would not last too long if you ran it across roads.

The common solution when you need more than 100m is to run fiber optic cables. There are other solution that let you use copper wire doing stuff like running your own DSL over it but the device you connect to the wire cost a real lot...fiber is expensive but it is still cheaper than the other options.

okay. your post puts everything in perspective. I guess it'd be cheaper to continue using two separate leased internet lines.