NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Solved
Wireless Repeater Nighthawk R6700v2
According to many sources on the forums, my R6700v2 is capable of acting as a wireless repeater. I have seen a literal ton of advanced features for the router and am impressed, but I see nothing about using the router as a repeater. This is one of the most basic uses for a wireless router so I am sure I am doing something wrong.
I have tried the following:
https://kb.netgear.com/24108/How-do-I-configure-my-Nighthawk-router-as-a-wireless-repeater
I don't see ADVANCED > Advanced Setup > Wireless Repeating in the advanced setup menu.
I'm going to return both units and avoid Netgear all together. I honestly can't comprehend why they would include so many features I do not need on a wireless router, but not wireless repeating.
6 Replies
> According to many sources on the forums, [...]
Thanks for the helpful links.
> [...] my R6700v2 is capable of acting as a wireless repeater. [...]
You couldn't prove it by the User Manual. Visit
http://netgear.com/support , put in your model number, and look for
Documentation. Get the User Manual. Look for "repeat". For a good
time, try that again for the "R7000".> [...] This is one of the most basic uses for a wireless router [...]
Not for this one?
> [...] so I am sure I am doing something wrong.
Trusting Netgear product documentation?
> https://kb.netgear.com/24108
Trust no one, I always say. (The firmware could have changed, too.)
> [...] I have seen a literal ton of advanced features for the router
> [...]You must be using some _new_ meaning of "literal".
This was posted by a forum mod here:
Yes, it seems to have support for VPN, DynamicDNS and wireless bridging but not repeating a signal... weird.
Unless you are a C programmer I don't see the point of using those ironic underscores like Linus Torvalds. It's like you're trying to let the world know you discovered PHP magic constants or Python's dunder methods.
> This was posted by a forum mod here: [...]
Perhaps it was true then. Firmware "updates" are not called
"upgrades" for a reason.
> Unless you are a C programmer [...]I do write some C, but I don't see its relevance. Your analysis of
simple, low-effort underlining is too deep for me. "ironic"? I was
trying for "emphatic".