NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
AP Mode Vs Router Mode—both seem to work
Just installed a new R7800 router. Set it up initially using default settings. I connected it to my modem with an Ethernet cable. All works as expected. Although…my modem is also a router. So what I had was a modem/router with DHCP enabled, and the R7800 with DHCP enabled. The modem/router happily gave the R7800 an IP address (192.168.1.xx) and the R7800 happily gave the devices connected to it by WiFi their own IP addresses, from a different series (10.0.0.xx). Everything worked fine.
Then I read in the user manual that with the system I had, with the R7800 connected to a router, I should really be configuring the R7800 in AP Mode, not Router Mode. So, I did this, changed to AP Mode—and everything is working fine. Still. The difference is that the devices on the R7800's WiFi network now have IP addresses allocated by the modem/router, in the 192.168.1.xx series.
As far as I can tell both set-ups function. But being of an **bleep** disposition I'd like to know if there are any advantages or disadvantages of the two methods. Since everything seemed to work fine with the R7800 in Router Mode, why is AP Mode even offered?
Any thoughts?
> [...] The modem/router happily gave the R7800 an IP address
> (192.168.1.xx) and the R7800 happily gave the devices connected to it by
> WiFi their own IP addresses, from a different series (10.0.0.xx).
> Everything worked fine.
Yup. Try more things. For example, file sharing between systems on
the "192.168.1.*" subnet and systems on the "10.0.0.*" subnet. Or
anything which requires port forwarding to the inner subnet
("10.0.0.*").
Cascading routers doesn't wreck everything, but it does wreck many
things. If you don't notice or care, then it may not matter. If all
you ever do is use a web browser accessing the outside world, or an
e-mail client, or the like, then you might never have a problem. As
soon as you do anything on the inner subnet which involves a server
(like, say, file sharing, or a web server, or some games), then you can
expect to run into trouble.
> [...] why is AP Mode even offered?
Because many things work better (or more easily) if all your client
devices are on one subnet. Search these forums for terms like "double
NAT", and see some of the trouble people get into when they cascade two
(or, in a few cases, more) routers.
6 Replies
> [...] The modem/router happily gave the R7800 an IP address
> (192.168.1.xx) and the R7800 happily gave the devices connected to it by
> WiFi their own IP addresses, from a different series (10.0.0.xx).
> Everything worked fine.
Yup. Try more things. For example, file sharing between systems on
the "192.168.1.*" subnet and systems on the "10.0.0.*" subnet. Or
anything which requires port forwarding to the inner subnet
("10.0.0.*").
Cascading routers doesn't wreck everything, but it does wreck many
things. If you don't notice or care, then it may not matter. If all
you ever do is use a web browser accessing the outside world, or an
e-mail client, or the like, then you might never have a problem. As
soon as you do anything on the inner subnet which involves a server
(like, say, file sharing, or a web server, or some games), then you can
expect to run into trouble.
> [...] why is AP Mode even offered?
Because many things work better (or more easily) if all your client
devices are on one subnet. Search these forums for terms like "double
NAT", and see some of the trouble people get into when they cascade two
(or, in a few cases, more) routers.Thanks antinode. What you say makes sense.
In fact I only have devices with which I'm unlikely to want to communicate on the 192.168.1.** subnet—Apple TV, a television, and a PVR. All my computing devices—Macs, iPhones, iPads—are connected via WiFi to the 10.0.0.** subnet.
Nevertheless I see no reason not to go with your recommendation to use AP Mode, and keep everything on the one subnet.
It's recommended to bridge the modem fully if possible and let the R7800 handle internet services, however...
You can also run the R7800 in Router mode if you want to with the modem/router. You should use the DMZ on the modem for the IP address the R7800 gets from the modem. Just disable any Wifi radios and uPnP features on the modem when using this configuration.
AP mode is offered in cases where there are other routers in place and adding flexibility to add wifi or even upgrade wifi maybe desired. I've used older routers that work for different needs than the R7800, however the wifi on those older routers are out dated, so connecting a R7800 up in AP mode upgrades the wifi and works well in these configurations.
kevanpwrote:Just installed a new R7800 router. Set it up initially using default settings. I connected it to my modem with an Ethernet cable. All works as expected. Although…my modem is also a router. So what I had was a modem/router with DHCP enabled, and the R7800 with DHCP enabled. The modem/router happily gave the R7800 an IP address (192.168.1.xx) and the R7800 happily gave the devices connected to it by WiFi their own IP addresses, from a different series (10.0.0.xx). Everything worked fine.
Then I read in the user manual that with the system I had, with the R7800 connected to a router, I should really be configuring the R7800 in AP Mode, not Router Mode. So, I did this, changed to AP Mode—and everything is working fine. Still. The difference is that the devices on the R7800's WiFi network now have IP addresses allocated by the modem/router, in the 192.168.1.xx series.
As far as I can tell both set-ups function. But being of an **bleep** disposition I'd like to know if there are any advantages or disadvantages of the two methods. Since everything seemed to work fine with the R7800 in Router Mode, why is AP Mode even offered?
Any thoughts?
Thanks for the reply FURRYe38. Unfortunately I have no idea what you mean "bridge the modem fully". Bridge Mode, according to the R7800 user manual, is for linking two routers via WiFi. That's not want I want to do.
And DMZ and uPnP are foreign terms to me!
Thanks all the same
> [...] I have no idea what you mean "bridge the modem fully". Bridge
> Mode, according to the R7800 user manual, is for linking two routers via
> WiFi. [...]
"Bridge" is one of those terms which gets (over-)used to mean
different things in different situations. Generally, it means to
connect two things without trying to add any intelligence to the
connection.
Here, "bridge the modem fully" probably means to switch your
modem+router into a modem-only mode, disabling its router functions,
which would make your R7800 the only router in the system. That's
another way to avoid cascading two routers. However, that way, your
original modem+router would be too stupid to act as a wireless access
point (or anything else), so all your client devices would need to be
connected to the R7800.
Bridge-mode in the R7800 User Manual refers to a different kind of
bridge, where the R7800 acts as a wireless client device (using its
wireless capability to connect ("bridge") its Ethernet LAN to some other
wireless router). Which, as you say, is not what you want.
> And DMZ and uPnP are foreign terms to me!
For "DMZ", visit Korea? As with many/most problems, many things are
possible. Using a DMZ on the main router can avoid some of the problems
involved with cascading two routers, but it's not clear that you'd gain
much/anything that way.
I'd stick with AP mode for the R7800, and wait for the appearance of
some reason to do anything else.
I agree with antidote. Keep it simple.
You can input words like Bridge, wireless bridge, upnp and DMZ into wikipedia if you want know what some of these terms mean.
