NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Network Connection Issue: "The router cannot connect to the Internet with the current settings."
I just switched to a WNR1000v3 hooked up to an SBG6580 router/modem whose WiFi seemed to be unreliable, and I've been experiencing a strange problem where I can visit websites just fine, but I can't ...
> I just switched to a WNR1000v3 hooked up to an SBG6580 router/modem
> whose WiFi seemed to be unreliable, [...]
It's tough to believe that an antique like that could be the solution
to any ordinary wireless-network problem, but...
"hooked up" how, exactly? If the [ARRIS?] SBG6580 gateway is (still)
configured as a (modem+)router, then it would probably be wise to
configure the WNR1000v3 as a wireless access point, rather than as a
full-function router.
Visit http://netgear.com/support , put in your model number, and look
for Documentation. Get the User Manual (at least). Read.
When I did that, I didn't see a simple WAP option, but almost any
wireless router can be configured that way. 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, including your antique.
Note that that scheme leaves the WAN/Internet port on the
router-as-WAP unconnected. (A WAP is all-LAN. A model with the
one-step WAP option effectively reconfigures its WAN/Internet port as
another LAN port. Without the one-step WAP option, you need to use only
the LAN ports.)
General advice:
> [...] I can't ping urls via command prompt [...]
"can't" is not a useful problem description. It does not say what
you did. It does not say what happened when you did it. As usual,
showing actual actions (commands) with their actual results (error
messages, LED indicators, ...) can be more helpful than vague
descriptions or interpretations. Especially when using a command-line
program, copy+paste is your friend.
> [...] seemed to be unreliable, [...]
"seemed"? "unreliable"? See "not a useful problem description
[...]", above.
>It's tough to believe that an antique like that could be the solution
to any ordinary wireless-network problem, but...I can't really try to troubleshoot the original device since it isn't mine.
>"hooked up" how, exactly? If the [ARRIS?] SBG6580 gateway is (still)
configured as a (modem+)router, then it would probably be wise to
configure the WNR1000v3 as a wireless access point, rather than as a
full-function router.I tried setting the WNR1000v3 into access point mode like you suggested, and while my initial problems are now gone, the connection speed is stuck at ~2.5Mbps up/down when they were ~10Mbps previously.
>"can't" is not a useful problem description. It does not say what
you did. It does not say what happened when you did it. As usual,
showing actual actions (commands) with their actual results (error
messages, LED indicators, ...) can be more helpful than vague
descriptions or interpretations.Every ping attempt timed out, resulting in a loss rate of 100%.
>"seemed"? "unreliable"? See "not a useful problem description
[...]", above.I didn't go into detail about the reliability problems because I figured an issue with the original device's WiFi isn't relevant, seeing how I'm no longer using it, instead using CAT5 to connect it to the WNR1000v3.