NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
R6220 set in "Access Point Mode", slower download speeds ?
Hello, So I recently got myself a router (the Netgear R6220) in my room because the router provided by my ISP is too far from my computer, so we passed cables in the walls, and everything was wor...
> Because then I have a Wi-Fi hotspot in my room, [...]
Ok. I know nothing, but my first hypothesis (guess) is that the
(non-deluxe) R6220 is too slow if you use its WAN/Internet port for the
connection to the main router. If that is the problem, then I see two
possibilities:1. Use a gigabit/s-capable network switch for the speed-critical
wired devices, and connect the R6220-as-WAP to that switch for your
(less speed-critical) wireless needs.2. Try using a different WAP configuration scheme for the R6220,
which does not use its WAN/Internet port. See, for example:https://community.netgear.com/t5/x/x/m-p/1463500
That's written for a Netgear C6300-as-WAP, but the steps are about the
same for any other router (any make/model) which lacks a one-step WAP
option. If the router which you're reconfiguring has a WAN/Internet
Ethernet port (unlike a Cxxxx), then leave it unconnected.You might see some odd (but minor?) problems that way, like, say, the
Internet LED might not look right, or the R6220 can't find a time
server, so its date+time might be wrong. I'd run the experiment, and
see if the wired speed improves, and then see if there are any
significant problems. It should be educational, at least.
> [...] I recently got myself a router (the Netgear R6220) in my room
> because the router provided by my ISP is too far from my computer, so we
> passed cables in the walls, [...]
If you're connecting everything using Ethernet cables, then why buy a
router (and configure it as a wireless access point)? Why not spend
less, and get a (simple, cheap, Gb/s) network switch?
Because then I have a Wi-Fi hotspot in my room, that I can use for my phone, for my printer, for my laptop
> Because then I have a Wi-Fi hotspot in my room, [...]
Ok. I know nothing, but my first hypothesis (guess) is that the
(non-deluxe) R6220 is too slow if you use its WAN/Internet port for the
connection to the main router. If that is the problem, then I see two
possibilities:1. Use a gigabit/s-capable network switch for the speed-critical
wired devices, and connect the R6220-as-WAP to that switch for your
(less speed-critical) wireless needs.2. Try using a different WAP configuration scheme for the R6220,
which does not use its WAN/Internet port. See, for example:https://community.netgear.com/t5/x/x/m-p/1463500
That's written for a Netgear C6300-as-WAP, but the steps are about the
same for any other router (any make/model) which lacks a one-step WAP
option. If the router which you're reconfiguring has a WAN/Internet
Ethernet port (unlike a Cxxxx), then leave it unconnected.You might see some odd (but minor?) problems that way, like, say, the
Internet LED might not look right, or the R6220 can't find a time
server, so its date+time might be wrong. I'd run the experiment, and
see if the wired speed improves, and then see if there are any
significant problems. It should be educational, at least.Damn, all I did was
- Unplug the cable that came from my ISP router to the R6220 WAN port
- Plug it in one of the LAN ports
Here are some speedtests I got :
https://www.speedtest.net/result/11128676829
https://www.speedtest.net/result/11128679161
https://www.speedtest.net/result/11128683159
https://www.speedtest.net/result/11128687080
So there are definitely improvements, thanks I guess ? :p
> [...] all I did was [...]
That's ok for a quick speed test, but you might want to go through
the rest of that procedure. Again, I know nothing, but without its
WAN/Internet port connection, the R6220 might not be able to get its own
LAN IP address using DHCP, which would become a problem if you ever want
to talk to its management web server. Part of that procedure assigns a
static IP address to the router-as-WAP, so that it doesn't need to use
DHCP.As usual, you can try it, and see what (if anything) goes wrong.
> So there are definitely improvements, [...]
If you got those numbers the way you had been getting your "~700 or
800Mbps", then I'd agree.