NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Considerations for using either Router or Access Point mode
Hello,
I'm tapping the technical expertise of the community. I've searched through a number of threads and many of them are very situational, and in fact even the genesis of this thread has a situation that has triggered the question.
In a very basic sense, if buying a 400 USD router, one would expect to use it as it was designed full featured. I'm having some doubts about this premise and it was based on one of the threads I had read. It went something like, well you have a router already sitting in front of the Orbi, so no need to have a second one doing essentially the same job. In fact, using Orbi as a router when another router is already in place brings with it some significant effort configuring both routers to work correctly. Add to that the continuing bungles of firmware, and one can easily question what in fact is the proper and optimal way to set things up.
To go back to the situational point, I look at my own usage of the Orbi, what configuation changes do I implement that make it unique above and beyond what I already have in the ISP router? And it boils down to one thing, configuring DNS servers. Others may have more esoteric needs, but I've only utilized DNS changes. The changes have a number of considerations that touch both performance and privacy. On the latter, it's difficult to know who to trust anymore when it comes to use of internet and I'll leave that for another discussion, but I thought it might be helpful to provide some context of why I made the change.
As I already have a router in place due to my ISP, it certainly seems plausible to revert the Orbi to run as an Access Point only. I still get the benefits of the superior WiFi and wirelss backhaul. Double NAT on IPv4 is also eliminated. But I lose the DNS configurability.
Are there any other reasons or considerations around the use of AP vs router mode I've overlooked in my analysis? I realize in the end it's my choice and just looking to make sure all the relevant facts are consided in the decision.
Thank you.
16 Replies
What do you mean by "But I lose the DNS configurability."? If in AP mode, your DNS configurations would be at the main host router. So you can configure DNS here. Or you should be able to. Might depend on ISP modem feature support here as well.
DMZ or IP Pass-Thru helps in most cases if users what to run two routers on the same line.
Simplified operation in cases where ISP modems can't be bridged fully or DMZ or IP Pass thru doesn't work, then AP mode would be recommended.
Up to users and there skill level to figure out what works best for them.
FURRYe38 wrote:What do you mean by "But I lose the DNS configurability."? If in AP mode, your DNS configurations would be at the main host router. So you can configure DNS here. Or you should be able to. Might depend on ISP modem feature support here as well.
DMZ or IP Pass-Thru helps in most cases if users what to run two routers on the same line.
Simplified operation in cases where ISP modems can't be bridged fully or DMZ or IP Pass thru doesn't work, then AP mode would be recommended.
Up to users and there skill level to figure out what works best for them.
As I pointed out I think twice, there are cases, especially in a proprietary router given by an ISP, that DNS cannot be controlled. It's their product and their implementation and they choose what level of control they want to give to their customers.
Also, what constitutes the criteria in your second paragraph. I can certainly make the case that IP Passthrough works as it's intended. But it is not true bridge. I'm still subject to packet processing by the host gateway.
When you say it's up to the user, in fact that is the very basis of the thread, to help figure that out. Am I giving up anything more than DNS configurability by moving to AP mode that I haven't considered. If the answer is no, then indeed it's up to me and I can try out AP mode to see if how well it performs for the sorts of things we do here. There could be some thing I've overlooked, because taking the time to reconfigure the network is disruptive and before I do it I want to make sure I'm not wasting everyone's time.
Down the road, the implementation of internet access can change as the service itself changes. If am offered the ability to put my own router on the internet in the future, I'll likely do it precisely because of the ability to control how the connection works. But it appears there are cases where that is not possible as is the scenario I'm describing. I do have the ability to run the Orbi in either mode and I'm looking for all the reasons and facts out there so as to pick one versus the other.
Yes I agree, some ISPs and some of these ISP provided gateways don't offer alot in advanced user configurations. Some ISPs lock users out as well.
As mentioned, you have a gateway modem and you are using IP Pass Thru. This should be enough for you to continue using the Orbi in router mode thus giving you the controls you need to configure at this level if you want to run in router mode.Yes eventually one would find an ISP that provided modem configurations or support of modem only units thus giving users the ability to connect external routers and do there own configurations with them. If users have these available services in there home town.
gr8sho wrote:But I lose the DNS configurability.
I ran my Orbi behind a router for over a year with "no problems", until I wanted to configure VPN so I could manage the Orbi remotely and "ran into a wall". So you are correct. "Double-NAT" is not an issue until it is an issue.
As FURRYe38 pointed out, most routers have the same capabilities for defining DNS servers as the Orbi router. If you post the brand & model number, I'm happy to help look for the User Manual. Or, a call to the ISP technical support line may help.
(I a way, I'm happy that you did not mention a desire to use Armor or Disney Circle, as those features give me chills.)
CrimpOn wrote:I ran my Orbi behind a router for over a year with "no problems", until I wanted to configure VPN so I could manage the Orbi remotely and "ran into a wall". So you are correct. "Double-NAT" is not an issue until it is an issue.
As FURRYe38 pointed out, most routers have the same capabilities for defining DNS servers as the Orbi router. If you post the brand & model number, I'm happy to help look for the User Manual. Or, a call to the ISP technical support line may help.
(I a way, I'm happy that you did not mention a desire to use Armor or Disney Circle, as those features give me chills.)
Well, I wasn't thinking of those at all as I dismiss them, more of advanced features like implementing VLANs.
Now to your point of most routers, what we get from an ISP doesn't fall into the realm of "most routers". The Arris BGW210-700 likely could have the capability of overriding the DNS, but as consumers of the ATT internet product, we are not offered that level of control. So if I choose to use the Orbi as merely an Access Point, I forfeit the ability to control the DNS. But because I'm stuck having to use their gateway, I'm still stuck with that box in the middle. Part of me just wants to throw my hands up in the air and simply comply with the restriction imposed on me and just deal with what I'm given.
I'm confused. The "footer" on the message says:
Orbi RBK50 in Router mode, fed by 100/20 Mbps VDSL2 connected Arris BGW210 gateway in IP Passthrough
I thought "IP Passthrough" means that the modem is not routing, in which case the Orbi really needs to be in router mode.
