Author Topic: Wireless AP instead of a router  (Read 3922 times)

RoadRanger

  • SysGod
  • Counselor
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: NE CT USA
  • Posts: 1776
  • "Wherever you go, There you are"
    • Cacophony Forums
Wireless AP instead of a router
« on: April 08, 2015, 04:42:17 AM »
Your typical wireless router has four function stuffed into one box:
Router (not needed by us in most configurations).
Multiport Switch.
DHCP server (not needed if you assign a static IPs to the DL1608 and iPads).
Wireless Access Point (or two if dual band).
It's quite possible to have those functions in separate devices.

Just for yucks I decided to switch over to a wireless AP instead of using a wireless router. I got it running tonight.
I'm now running a 5 GHz wireless AP (Buffalo WLAE-AG300N) - no router or DHCP server. The AP's web I/F is at 192.168.11.100 , I'm running these settings so I can configure it from my iPads:
DL1608 IP=192.168.0.168 Mask=255.255.240.0 Gateway=192.168.0.1
Ipad2#1  IP=192.168.0.169 (same Mask and Gateway)
Ipad2#2  IP=192.168.0.170 (same Mask and Gateway)
IpadMini  IP=192.168.0.171 (same Mask and Gateway)

My biggest issue in getting it going was that I had to set a static IP on my laptop to configure the AP via wired and Windows 10 doesn't let you set static IPs (yet?). I borrowed my wife's laptop and got the WiFi turned on. Dunno why the DL1608 asks for a gateway since AFAIK it will never try to use one?  Had a bit of trouble until I set the Masks the same, maybe something to do with what IP discovery (broadcast) uses? i could "see" the DL but it would say "DL1608 - Disconnected" if I tried to connect until I set the Mask in the DL the same.

I did get a second identical AP as a backup, I'll have to configure it next. FYI I paid $24 shipped for the first one and $14 shipped for the second one. Nice thing about these is no wall warts 8) - bad thing is they can't run both 2.4 and 5 GHz simultaneously :-\ , not something I do anyways :) .
« Last Edit: April 08, 2015, 12:28:14 PM by RoadRanger »

nottooloud

  • Knight
  • ****
  • Location:
  • Posts: 271
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #1 on: April 08, 2015, 11:42:00 AM »
I've added an Engenius ENS500EXT 5GHz access point to my setup. I still run either an Airport Express or an Extreme for the DHCP. I've only had it out once, but it's a beast. Out on the loading dock behind the theatre I was working, the 5G signal from the Engenius was stronger than the 2.4G signal from the Extreme. It's POE, so you only run one cable to it, and it's made to pole mount outdoors, so for graduations and outdoor festivals I can put it way up on rigging someplace.

RoadRanger

  • SysGod
  • Counselor
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: NE CT USA
  • Posts: 1776
  • "Wherever you go, There you are"
    • Cacophony Forums
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #2 on: April 08, 2015, 12:31:25 PM »
^ Nice!

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2622
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2015, 04:42:59 PM »
Haven't looked at the setup for the AP but you should be able to keep it to one subnet (ie. 192.168.0.x mask at 255.255.255.0) not the whole B network. What's with the 240 mask on the DL? That's probably why it needs a gateway address.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2015, 04:49:23 PM by WK154 »
When in doubt KISS

RoadRanger

  • SysGod
  • Counselor
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: NE CT USA
  • Posts: 1776
  • "Wherever you go, There you are"
    • Cacophony Forums
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2015, 05:23:09 PM »
Haven't looked at the setup for the AP but you should be able to keep it to one subnet (ie. 192.168.0.x mask at 255.255.255.0) not the whole B network. What's with the 240 mask on the DL? That's probably why it needs a gateway address.
Yah, I could have put everything in the 192.168.11.x space so that I could include the default IP of the AP but there's really no downside to making it a bit "bigger", no? Don't think the DL actually needs a gateway address as the one  I gave it doesn't exist  ;) . I assume it's there just because the code they "borrowed" had it...

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2622
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2015, 07:36:30 PM »
Haven't looked at the setup for the AP but you should be able to keep it to one subnet (ie. 192.168.0.x mask at 255.255.255.0) not the whole B network. What's with the 240 mask on the DL? That's probably why it needs a gateway address.
Yah, I could have put everything in the 192.168.11.x space so that I could include the default IP of the AP but there's really no downside to making it a bit "bigger", no? Don't think the DL actually needs a gateway address as the one  I gave it doesn't exist  ;) . I assume it's there just because the code they "borrowed" had it...
Yup defaults are always an easy target and the narrower you make the address range the harder it is to find and hack. Hardware handles that part. They used the TCP stack of uLinux code and don't have the expertise to change that, so it's probably the reason.
On the other hand I've never heard of anyone being hacked in this environment. You competition want's to make you look bad?
« Last Edit: April 09, 2015, 07:38:09 PM by WK154 »
When in doubt KISS

RoadRanger

  • SysGod
  • Counselor
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: NE CT USA
  • Posts: 1776
  • "Wherever you go, There you are"
    • Cacophony Forums
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2015, 07:46:21 PM »
Yup defaults are always an easy target and the narrower you make the address range the harder it is to find and hack. Hardware handles that part. They used the TCP stack of uLinux code and don't have the expertise to change that, so it's probably the reason.
On the other hand I've never heard of anyone being hacked in this environment. You competition want's to make you look bad?
My competition is all Behringer ;D

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2622
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2015, 08:29:26 PM »
Yup defaults are always an easy target and the narrower you make the address range the harder it is to find and hack. Hardware handles that part. They used the TCP stack of uLinux code and don't have the expertise to change that, so it's probably the reason.
On the other hand I've never heard of anyone being hacked in this environment. You competition want's to make you look bad?
My competition is all Behringer ;D
Time to switch to Midas.
When in doubt KISS

RoadRanger

  • SysGod
  • Counselor
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: NE CT USA
  • Posts: 1776
  • "Wherever you go, There you are"
    • Cacophony Forums
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2015, 08:52:35 PM »
Time to switch to Midas.
You mean Midringer? ;)

WK154

  • Door #3
  • Master
  • *****
  • Location: Valencia CA
  • Posts: 2622
Re: Wireless AP instead of a router
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2015, 11:32:29 PM »
Time to switch to Midas.
You mean Midringer? ;)
Yeah that one. Image is everything in show biz.
When in doubt KISS