I have a somewhat difficult router situation at my house.

I am currently using a pair of WRT54GL routers to provide wireless coverage to my condominium and to the condominium below mine in the same building.

The "primary" router runs a LAN (my computer, SWMBO's iMac, cable modem, OOMA VOIP phone, color laser printer) through Ethernet. Its wireless signal goes out my window and feeds a "repeater" router out on the deck of the condominium below mine. These routers were configured for me by Mark Lord and have worked well for the past several years. The primary router is running the native Cisco firmware, and Mark set up the repeater with DD-WRT.

Both routers are becoming a bit flaky, and I think they will need to be replaced in the not too distant future.

Mark has suggested that I upgrade to Class-N routers, and this seems reasonable to me. The Class-N routers are rated to have considerably more range than the Class-G routers (three to five times more), so I am wondering if perhaps I could get by with a single Class-N to cover both floors. Currently the lower floor can "see" the primary router, but signal strength is such that there is no reliable internet connectivity.

The increased speed/throughput of the Class-N is not a factor, since my ISP provides a maximum 15Mbps per second, of which I've never seen more than 14.

Of course, increased range through the air does not necessarily mean increased penetration through concrete, and therein lies the problem. The floor/ceiling between the two condominiums is 14 inches of steel-reinforced concrete, which is pretty effective at damping out wireless signals.

I understand that the 2.4GHz band is better at penetrating walls than the 5GHz band, and I think that some of our wireless equipment may not be 5GHz capable, so dual-band is not necessary. 2.4GHz is all I want.

So... what is the likelihood of a Class-N router punching a signal through the floor to the condominium below? And if it might work, are there recommendations for any particular router?

tanstaafl.

Is it possible to locate the 'main' router very close to, or perhaps just outside, the window?
Is the 'main deck' a potential location for the single router?

If there is a stairwell that leads to the lower unit, or is there a location that would present a radio path with less obstruction?

The thinking is that a single WiFi source may better 'illuminate' both residences if the location of the main unit is rethought.

In general I have found that within a 'typical' residence the WiFi/router unit when located at head height or a little higher provides generally good dispersion.

In your situation I suspect that most of the radio propagation is occurring through windows, doorways, and other openings in the structure. Especially between floors. So think about where there are 'thin spots' in the structure, from a radio perspective.

The radio signal will of course also be affected by large metal items which can create 'radio shadows'. Metal ductwork, large appliances, metal desk, metal doors.

Without a rather thorough 3D model of the structure it can be difficult to estimate how successful a single router might be, even one with amped up radio specs.

Is there a chance of just running a wire thru the floor and installing the second router at the end of the wife.

He brought that up before, when he was planning the wireless setup in the first place, a long time ago. The wire is not really feasible as it would need to be through concrete, if I recall correctly.

Drilling a hole through concrete is not a terribly difficult thing to do. Even one 14" deep. Long masonry bits exist at hardware stores for exactly such purposes (well, intended for thick walls rather than floors, but close enough).

That remains the best technical solution.

Next up, drill 3/16" holes through an upper story window frame, and a lower story window frame, and run the cabling through those. Also a very good technical solution.

The problem with most consumer grade Wifi gear is that a lot of it tends to run HOT. Which can be a problem for setups like the current outdoor repeater. A purpose-built pole-mount style of repeater might deal better with the elements, but those do tend to cost as much as 3-5 of the current WRT54GL unit out there.

Another idea I had, was to locate the upstairs wifi next to a window with a really good view of the lower balcony/terrace. And place a suitable metal object down on that balcony to reflect signals between that wifi unit and the suite downstairs. Might work, might not. Easy to mock up and try with some foil wrap or a metal patio table.

As for the existing routers, like most electronics, all that can/will fail are the electrolytic capacitors. Most likely in the power supply dongles before anything else. So just replacing those relatively cheap items can often extend the lifetime of the gear by another few years.

Cheers!

As you can see, there is no easy way to place the primary router so that it could illuminate both residences without stringing cables along the floor and through the air in a most unsightly manner. Should I wish to remain married, this would not be optimal.

The first picture shows the current setup with the repeater in place out on the deck of the lower unit.

Mark has made a suggestion that I at first dismissed as impractical, but then after thinking about it, would appear to be a workable solution.

With some effort (I'll have to hire it done, I don't have a hammer drill and an 18" masonry bit) I can drill a 1/2" hole through my floor and into the bedroom ceiling of the room below. I could then run an Ethernet cable down to the second router which would mount on the ceiling. Mark says that instead of being a repeater, the second router would be a simple Access Point, with double the throughput of the current repeater setup. The hole would be quite unobtrusive and SWMBO concurs that it would be OK to "mutilate" the house to that small extent.

One small difficulty will be securing the router to the ceiling. I'll probably end up doing something crude, like pop-rivet aluminum strips to the feet of the router, protruding an inch or so out past the sides, so that when the router is mounted upside down on the ceiling I can run screws through the strips into anchors in the ceiling. Maybe paint the router and the strips to match the ceiling.

Uh-oh! I have to get power to the router as well. Can I run the power cord right along the Ethernet cable without causing interference?

So far this looks like my best solution. I can keep using my G-Class routers and replace them one at a time when they finally quit, configuration is much simpler and straightforward, enough so that even I can manage it, only one wireless network will be required, and overall performance will be better.

tanstaafl.

Sure, no problem having the power cable alongside the ethernet.

With a half-inch hole, I don't know if the RJ45 plugs will fit through the hole or not -- might need to just feed a raw cable end through the hole, and have somebody crimp a new connector onto it afterward.

One thought, if you're going to do a ceiling mount: shop around for a small, modern router (no more than USD$20) with keyhole slots for screws on the underside. Makes mounting easier, and probably will look better too. The model I would like to recommend (tp link wr720n v1) is no longer sold, but was small, cheap, and very low on power usage.

Configure the downstairs router as a "router", with a separate SSID on a different channel from the upstairs one.

Cheers

Also note, depending upon where the hole ends up in the ceiling downstairs, you could just run the network cabling to a corner, and then down the wall to floor/desk level there. And put the router and power dongle together on a table or floor there.

One caveat for drilling: apart from steel, what else is embedded in that concrete floor? Any pipes, wires?

-ml

802.11n routers can optionally support a feature called beamforming. Specifically for your needs, you would want one that does implicit beamforming.

This allows the router to use multiple antennas to focus the power of the radio signal directionally towards the wireless client (your neighboors computer or other device). Implicit means the wireless client is passive in this setup, the router works alone to support it.

802.11ac equipment has beamforming as part of the base spec instead of being optional. However it is an explicit setup requiring both the router and devices to work together for beamforming. There may be a 802.11ac class router that does the implicit 802.11n style beamforming too, though I've not researched consumer routers in a while.

There's no guarantee that beamforming would alleviate the concrete issues, it would at least let the router direct about a 3db signal increase though.

Mostly an alternative suggestion to the other discussions already going in the other threads. For my own use at home, 802.11ac beamforming is helping my desktop get a nearly solid 700mbit wireless link to my NAS without an ethernet cable. Without beamforming, it was getting around ~500mbit or so and a slightly weaker signal.

I hesitate to disagree, but configuring the secondary WiFi unit as a 'router' would create a double NAT configuration, no? Is this intentional, to prevent the computers on the second WiFi from easily 'seeing' the primary local network?

Personally I prefer to utilize the 'guest network' facility in a modern router to create two WiFi networks with separate SSID but central control and monitoring of everything from the primary router. In my current case these happen to be Apple gear, AirPort Extreme and Airport Express. Certainly easy to manage , and for me they have tended to be very stable over time. Pretty good signal quality and range, the stability and consistency has been the attractive aspect.

I long ago tired of the bleeding edge WiFi gear that needs multiple updates before it becomes trustworthy, if it ever gets there. And the really cheap stuff is all over the map, can consume a lot time and energy sifting through all the crap looking for something that won't become trouble later on.

I measured. 12mm, or .47 inches. Three hundredths of an inch to spare, and if I know Victor (my contractor) his masonry bit will be bent enough that the hole will actually come out closer to 9/16ths then half an inch.

Not where we'll be drilling. The steel... just hope we miss it.

tanstaafl.

Some routers have keyhole style mounting holes on the underside, which can hold the unit to the ceiling of the holes are carefully located and the screws are just the right size to provide a snug fit, and screwed in until they just barely allow the slots to fit over the screws and slide into position.

If you choose this method, I can provide a tip for getting the drilled hole locations fairly precise without any measuring.

There are purpose made ceiling mounts, this one fits the compact Apple Airport Express router.

[video:youtube]http://youtu.be/cWLjo9yPFKc[/video]

I suggest making the hole a tad larger, perhaps 3/4" size. Power cord for the router with end attached will need some wiggle room, and the sharp cornered RJ45 plugs tend to snag.

Thread a pull cord (string) through first, then draw one cable at a time through. Make the pull cord long enough that you don't pull the other end through, create a loop in the middle and use that to bring the cord ends down.

Half an inch should be fine for the RJ45 and the power plug. Actually, gimme a minute, and I'll go drill a half inch hole in a block of wood and test it out..


EDIT:
Okay, just tried it through a 3.5" thick chunk of wood. A 1/2" hole will NOT pass an RJ-45 connector at all. A 9/16" hole will pass one, but it is a close enough fit to make it very difficult.

No problem at all with just the ethernet cabling and then a DC-power cord from a WRT54GL.

Cheers

So I'll make a 5/8" hole. Probably the extra 16th won't weaken the floor so much that it will be dangerous.

I'll probably have to buy the bit for Victor, trade it to him for his using his hammer drill and making the hole. And yes, I am (with difficulty) resisting the temptation to buy my own hammer drill and bit and do it all myself. Figuring how often I actually need a hammer drill, over the next five years it would cost me about $30.00 per hole...

tanstaafl.

Consider using a Ubiquiti UniFi access point. Then you can inject power over ethernet and have it plugged into whatever power conditioner or UPS you have next to your computer. You also only need a drill a hole large enough for Cat5e, which is pretty slim.

As a bonus, they include everything you need to ceiling mount them and look reasonably nice mounted there on the ceiling. The LED status ring can be disabled if it's annoying.

If you need the tools to run a cable and crimp a new end on, I have them here. Let me know and maybe we can meet halfway or something. They sell cable and everything you need with it at Steren.

I've never used this company, but they have them on their website:
INTTELEC

I second the Unifi APs. If you only need an N version, they run around $80-90. The AC models are considerably more.

As the resident Google fanboy, I'd also check out the OnHub made by TP-Link. It has an impressive antenna array that reaches farther than any other home router I've tested so far. I have no idea how it'll do with your concrete floors, but in my own home it's able to go through two floors (wooden joist construction), a stairway, and several walls to a guest room in our basement. We've had people stay there several times and they've had no connectivity issues. When I test the signal strength it's still very good.

Anyway, just a suggestion. It's more expensive than a Unifi AP, but if you have to replace your router anyway, it's probably roughly equivalent.

Mmm.., apparently my recommended AP is still sold:

http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-WR720N-Wireless-150Mbps-Internal/dp/B008IFXQIW

At USD$21.50, it is a tad expensive (only cost me CAD$12/each when I last bought several), but still an order of magnitude less than some of the otherworldly suggestions here!

Looks really good on a wall or ceiling, too.

I love TP-Link's products, and I use them all the time, particularly their awesome travel routers that cost about as much.

My suggestion was for a router that might get through the concrete without drilling a hole and mounting something on the ceiling, while also offering 802.11ac and leapfrogging n altogether. But that might not be necessary.

The advantage to the Unifi product is that it's PoE, which will simplify things.

Chiming in late...

. I second the comment that, should you run a wire, it's really straightforward to add a new connector to it. The tools are designed to be idiot-proof, since electricians are often idiots. This means you may need to test that you terminated the wire correctly. At worst, I've needed 3 attempts to get a wire properly terminated.

. After that, the idea of doing a ceiling-mounted AP, powered with PoE seems pretty slick. That's the "dollar no cost, do it properly" solution.

. If you really want to stick with wireless, the beamforming stuff that people have talked about here is going to be an odd thing. Most APs will have antennae arranged in a circle of some sort, meaning that they can steer horizontally, like a lighthouse, but can't steer vertically. One of the things to play with, then, is tilting the AP, such that it has the chance to beam at a downward angle. This will require a huge amount of experimentation to get right.

. I don't know if it's feasible, but you could also investigate wireline networking. If the two apartments are on separate power meters, this would seem less likely to work, but it's certainly worth a shot.

Crimping an 8-pin UTP connector is generally a fiddly business, especially the first few times.

I will mention that it matters whether the individual thin wire conductors in the cable are flexible stranded wire or the stiffer 'solid conductor' type. The clear plugs that crimp on have different shapes to the tiny metal internal prongs. Using a 'stranded' connector on solid wire, or a 'solid' connector on stranded wire, will often result in a non-functioning connection, or even worse, a connection that becomes intermittent and troublesome over time.

Also be aware that one should not intermix CAT6 cables and crimp ends with CAT5e stuff. A pre-made CAT6 cable should work nicely with everything, but when hand crimping connectors the connector and cable must be of the same grade, CAT6 or CAT5(e).

Typically the cable that is sold on spools for running through walls and such is solid core wire while the pre-assembled Ethernet cables with connectors on both ends, aka patch cables, tend to use stranded wire for flexibility.

In this situation I would suggest using a factory assembled Ethernet cable with both ends in place, from a reputable source. Do not remove the end, make the hole big enough to fit the cable through without damage.

Look for either CAT5e or CAT6 rated cable. I consider CAT5 (without the e suffix) to be deprecated and not worth using as proper CAT5e cable is generally not more expensive.

Among low priced network cables it is not unusual for the ink printing on the cable jacket to over state the actual caliber of the cable product inside. There is almost no enforcement of technical standards regarding bulk manufactured cabling from low cost 'offshore' producers. Not just for Ethernet, of course, as we have seen with USB-C, HDMI, etc.

My own experiences with power line networking is that in almost every case I ended up removing the power line gear. Either it did not work consistently in the necessary locations, or it became troublesome later on. Often the problem causes were unclear ('electrical noise' from 'something' is often the prime suspect) or the power line devices themselves just became flakey.

I think that for the immediate future I will stick with the WRT54GL routers until they quit working, but I will connect the two routers by Ethernet through a hole in the floor/ceiling rather than wireless. Both of them have been working perfectly for the last week or so, so perhaps they will continue.

What configuration changes will be necessary for the second router, which is currently running as a repeater with DD-WRT, receiving a wireless signal from the primary router and then rebroadcasting it?

tanstaafl.

Acording to Amazon "There is a newer model of this item".

http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-WR841N-Wireless-Router-300Mbps/dp/B001FWYGJS/ref=dp_ob_title_ce

Do you also approve of this version?

Bah, it's not that bad. Sure, it takes a little practice, but it's pretty easy to do once you get the hang of it. Then again, I have the color order burned into my brain at this point, so maybe I forget how tough it was the first few times I did it.


You can get an SDS hammer drill for about $90, and non-SDS for as low as $30 in some places I'm looking. I may have missed it, but have you mentioned how thick your floor is? If you don't have to go too far you won't need the kind of long bits you can get with SDS drills. You'll still be able to find some pretty long bits, though. I think I have one that's 12", which I sometimes need to get through cinderblock plus plaster or drywall.

I have this cordless drill that does the job. It's not just a hammer drill, but works as a normal drill too. I use it for everything around the house, and it's essentially replaced the standard cordless drill I had before this one. Just tonight I installed a baby gate on our stairs (toddlers are scary) and used that to make the pilot holes. I guess if you already have a drill it's silly to get a hammer drill, but it might be a good time to upgrade the drill you have for features like brushless, cordless, etc.

+100 (!}

No direct experience with it, thus no recommendation one way or the other.
The original is HIGHLY recommended though, both from past first-person experience and from a power-consumption perspective (less than 3W at the outlet).

You can just plug in the ethernet cable (through the ceiling) and it will work. Plug it into one of the four LAN ports.

But.. Messy. VERY messy.

Instead, plug the ethernet cable into the WAN ("Internet") port, and then visit the web GUI on the device and set "Type" to "DHCP".

Unfortunately, my personal memory is worsening, and my own WRT54GL devices all have Tomato firmware rather than DD-WRT. But do (by all means!) email me if there is any confusion or issue. We'll sort it out. I can/will install DD-WRT on a spare to make things simpler for both of us!

-ml

When we had our attic space converted into a spare room, the electrician had to run power cables up the corner of the house (the fuse/distribution box is by the front door), which meant cutting channels in the brickwork and plaster (none of those hollow walls in this house) from the ground floor, up through what's now my study, to the top floor. Rather than have him attempt to wire up Ethernet, I just handed him a roll of CAT5e cable and asked him to do two runs: ground floor to corner study and ground floor to attic conversion, and to make sure he left 3 feet of cable sticking out at each end. I temporarily crimped connectors on the end to check continuity before they re-dressed the plastering, and then I did the wall boxes myself later.

That will result in a double NAT situation. Why is the straight plug in messy?

Just set it up with a second SSID and run it on the same network. Doesn't need any special settings. Set them up for different channels so they don't interfere with each other. You can possibly even set them to the same SSID etc and almost roam between them (not quite that simple).

Was there a requirement to keep the networks separate at all?

14 inches, lots of steel reinforcement, dense concrete, covered with 5--6mm ceramic tile. A real bitch to make a hole in!

Victor was the job foreman when the house was built, and he is very familiar with its construction.

tanstaafl.

Mark? Would this have anything to do with the issue we discussed re: the Sonos?

In the unlikely chance that anyone else is interested... with the present "double wireless" setup (wireless from my router to the one below which rebroadcasts the signal on a separate SSID) SWMBO's Sonos won't work unless connected by Ethernet. Sonos' tech support suggested that the second router was the cause of the problem, and indeed, unplugging that router allowed the Sonos to work properly.

tanstaafl.

If it were me, I'd do the following to the second router:

1- assign it an IP address outside DHCP of the primary router

2- disable DHCP

3- as you said, give it its own SSID on a different channel (or set both routers to auto for the channel and they'll figure it out)

4- run the ethernet cable from a LAN port of the primary router to a LAN port of the secondary router.

Step 3 is why I suggest Unifi equipment. Use two of those and they'll work out everything else and give you actual roaming capabilities. I believe DD-WRT might have added some seamless handoff stuff recently, but the Unifi equipment is so much easier to install and maintain, and is designed for the kind of mounting that's required here.

Speaking from my usual position of invincible ignorance... wouldn't it be logical to run the Ethernet cable from the LAN port of the primary route to the "Internet" port of the secondary? Wouldn't the secondary router then be just as happy with the incoming signal as it would be if the signal were coming from its own cable modem?

No doubt there are reasons why my simplistic assumptions are wrong, but I suspect they are beyond my pay grade.

tanstaafl.

Mark has the specific details of your setup, this is more a general response to help your understanding in general of home routers.

Your cable modem has one internet IP, and your router via it's internet port handles sharing that one address to your multiple devices. All your multiple devices lack an "internet" IP, and instead use IP addresses reserved for private use only.

It's like an apartment building. 123 Broadway St is the cable modem. The postmaster drives from the post office to 123 Broadway St via a road (ISP network). Then enters the building to go to the mail room (the router), and divides up all the mail into little mailboxes private to the building. A bill for apartment 221, some junk mail for apartment 312, and a legal letter to apartment 640 (Incoming traffic). In the outgoing box is a request for a Sears catalog from apartment 518 (outgoing request for Amazon.com). Each apartment is one of your devices attached to the router wirelessly or on the LAN ports. Each apartment shares the same street address and the mail room is the equivalent of NAT, a protocol the router uses to share the Internet IP/street address. Outsiders to the building have no idea how many mailboxes are inside that mail room.

By hooking into the internet port of the second router, internet traffic has to be delivered not through one mail room, instead now two. Lets say this is apartment 221. For some reason the apartment has a mail room inside it as well once inside the front door, and multiple locked rooms labeled A, B, and C. Mail now goes to a street address first (123 Broadway), then to the first mailbox for apartment 221, then to a second mailbox inside 221 labeled for 221-B.

Plugging into the LAN port bypasses the router portion of the secondary and treats any device connected to it the same as your upstairs router.

You may or may not want to have one shared private network between you and your neighbor. Which is independent of the choice to have one or two wireless networks.

No worries. It does seem illogical. This page has some explanation a little ways down.

Tomato and DD-WRT also have ways to turn the WAN port into an additional LAN port, but that's not really necessary.

Not to beat a dead horse, but let me put in one more endorsement for Unifi, with a pro/con list

Pro:

- seamless roaming between access points, which could be important now that you're going to have an AP in the lower floor that really could deliver signal to the first

- POE means you don't have to run power through that hole

- a real, included mounting bracket will make the result look great, like just another smoke detector (you'll see no wires)

- you don't have to worry about all this configuration confusion (don't have to deal with DHCP or flashing firmware, and there's only one place to plug any of the cables into

Cons:

- more expensive, requiring two APs and a router (you'd disable the wifi in the router). The base Unifi AP costs about $70. The longer range version, which might not be necessary in your configuration, is about $83. Lastly, they have a brand new 802.11ac dual band version that's about 40% of the previous cost at $99.

- the management software can be a little annoying at times, but they've really improved it in recent months with a big visual refresh


In the end, I totally understand going the less expensive route, though.

You could actually just use an AP and configure it to work with the existing router leaving wireless enabled. No reason to buy two unless you feel the need to control the entire network through UniFi Controller.

That is a good article. I actually understood a lot of it, and with a few more re-readings I might even have a limited grasp on routers and networking.

Thank you.

tanstaafl.

No, I was just aiming for the simplest possible way to set it up, from YOUR point of view. After all, you are the one who has to enter all of the settings, and DD-WRT is anything but "straightforward".

The idea is to factory-reset the WRT54GL, and then just set it up as a straightforward DHCP router, with the WAN port connected to any one of the LAN ports of the upstairs router. Double-NAT, yes, but very easy setup, and slightly better internal security than configuring it as an AP.

I find the DD-WRT interface immensely confusing. Sure, I can navigate it, but.. wow.

A new TP-Link WR720N would be easier to set up than this DD-WRT box, and look nicer too. $20 well spent.

By that, do you mean reflash the router with the standard Linksys firmware, so it is no longer DD-WRT?

tanstaafl.

I had kinda imagined leaving DDWRT on it.
But now that you mention it, it would be much better to reflash it. With Tomato, though, not the factory gunk.

I only had DDWRT on it for the "repeater" capability, which is missing from the GUI on Tomato.

Version 28-Standard?

Should I put Tomato on both routers?

tanstaafl.

No problem, though I like Tom's explanation and I'm going to start using that metaphor to explain this in the future.

My reason would be that you don't get any advantage from seamless handoff between the access points. The prime advantage with Unifi is that the APs talk to each other and hand off devices for best performance. In the setup you mention, the two APs don't talk to each other at all. I often get clients with setups like this who complain that they're standing next to one AP but their phone is connected to another AP with 1 bar of signal.

If you do, then you'll have an easier time maintaining both of them.

Not sure about versions -- haven't hunted for Tomato for a WRT54GL for a while, but I suppose the "official" v1.28 is a good enough starting point here. There are other derivatives out there that are much more up-to-date, but difficult to find. Eg. the "Toastman" variant.

For the router that already has DD-WRT installed, updating to Tomato is as simple as using the firmware-upgrade menu item.

For a stock Linksys WRT54GL, installing Tomato over the factory firmware probably involves a little extra effort -- I vaguely recall a multi-step process was required. Mr.Google can probably find the info.

Actually, I was wrong about that. Turns out the floor/ceiling was 21" (53 cm) thick. The hole is now in place. It turns out that a 5/8" hole is just right for an RJ45 connector, but only because Victor's 21.5" long drill bit (yes, we just made it!) was so out of true that the hole is probably closer to 3/4" than it is 5/8".

Now, next question in a row.

Have any of you ever taken apart a WRT54GL router? It would simplify my installation somewhat if I could drill through the mounting feet of the router and just run the screws directly into the ceiling, but I don't want to go stirring up bits of electronics with my drill bit. The mounting feet are indented at the top and project out the bottom, so that multiple routers can be stacked on on top of another, but are not hollow all the way through.

What are the chances that I could fun a 1/8" or 3/16" drill bit through them?

tanstaafl.

From this image, I'd guess no:




Three out of the four would hit circuit board. You know, the UniFi AP's come with a real nice mounting kit...

A long time ago, though it was a WRT54G (same case design). Linksys was going through multiple iterations of the electronics inside, at times with no indication in the model number that anything changed. It's best to check your unit yourself to be certain.

iFixit has some community guides on repairing/opening various Linksys units here: https://www.ifixit.com/Device/Linksys_Router

Basically that blue plastic piece is snapped into the black plastic piece. Refer to the pictures in these two teardowns for help on where to squeeze to open the case:

https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Linksys+WRT54GS+v2+Rear+Case+Replacement/7126
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Linksys+WRT54G+Motherboard+Replacement/7017

Yes, you can drill there, but only in the outmost edge of each of the four pod/feet things. The rubbery bits can be pried out with a knife/screwdriver first, and then it is safe to drill only outside of the "curved" edges of the router body.

If you want better access, open it up. Scary the first time, but here's how:

The blue/purple front detaches from the dark main body of the router. There are no screws (unless yours is old enough to have them under those rubber pads you removed above). Instead, just firmly grab one of the two back "feet" in one hand, the corresponding front "foot" from the same side of the router in the other hand, and pull hard/quickly. The front will snap apart from the main body, revealing the innards.

It helps to slice through the "do not tamper" sticker beforehand.

Looks like about 1/4" max space for drilling, on my v1.1 WRT54GL.

Cheers
Mark

Doug,

Is it supposed to be upside down, on the ceiling, or vertically mounted, on a wall?

If on a wall, what I did with my old WRT54G is:

- Mark on the wall where the feet would end up
- Remove the rubber parts from the feet - they should slide out of them.
- Nail/screw the rubber parts on the wall, from the inside - they are hollow.
- Slide the router feet back on them.

It stayed up for years. Hopefully the design has not changed and what I did is still doable. Also, I hope my English made sense. if not, feel free to ask.

Too bad I do not have a WRT54 here to take some pictures.

FCC IDs are about the only way to keep account of the various Linksys iterations.

The primary router is mounted on the side of my computer hutch, exactly as you described in your post.

The secondary router will be mounted upside down on the ceiling, right over the doorway between the bedroom and the kitchen/dining room, so hopefully the signal will propagate through both rooms.

Now what I need to do is find the proper inverter software to turn the data right side up because it will be coming out upside-down from the router mounted on the ceiling. Haven't been able to find it by Googling...

tanstaafl.

No! You just peel the stickers off and put them on the other way.

What!? And risk voiding the warranty? There must be a better way!

tanstaafl.

Warranties are always auto-inverting.

If you use your laptop upside down, that'll do.

Why not just use some Z-clips?

edit: maybe "offset clip" is a better name than Z-clip.

I have a thin strip of aluminum that can be easily cut and shaped. I'll take 3" long pieces, bend them into an "L" shape, pop-rivet them to the hollow portion of the router's mounting feet, then screw the whole mess into the ceiling with anchor bolts.

Oughta work. Maybe. Presently I'm waiting for the downstairs neighbor to leave town later this week so I can make the changeover without interrupting her internet service.

Let's see... I've got the router, the aluminum strip, the anchor bolts, the ladder, the cordless drill and a 1/4" masonry bit. Hmmm, I need a 3-meter Ethernet cable, and about four feet of two-conductor wire to extend the power supply connector. Some goggles would be useful for when I'm drilling into the cement ceiling above my head.

I'm probably over-thinking this whole thing. Reminds me of when I was having some carpentry work done in my basement in Alaska, bare drywall, no finish work had been done. I wanted to reposition a light switch, so I took careful measurements, made up drawings, put marks on the walls, and started to explain to the carpenter in great detail what needed to be done. While listening to me explain, the carpenter whipped out his cordless sabre saw, cut around the light switch, took his hammer and knocked the switch box off the stud, cut a similar sized hole next to the stud at the new location, knocked the nail which was still dangling on the light switch box into the new stud, stuck the original piece of drywall around the light switch, put the second piece into the hole left from the original location, and said he'd sand and tape the two spots later.

What would have been a weekend project for me he did and finished before I could finish explaining what I wanted done. A bit humbling. The plumber I had working to install the new furnace told me: The difference between an apprentice and a journeyman is, the journeyman knows how to fix his mistakes.

tanstaafl.

Overthinking: "drilling into the cement ceiling above my head"

Aren't you upstairs? Don't you have a floor?

-jk

Aluminum is easy to form, but it is metal. If you have a suitable non-metallic material that would provide less possibility of messing with the WiFi radio propagation patterns.

Some plastics can be shaped and formed with mild localized heat such as a heat gun. Or find something plastic with a useable shape and cut pieces from it.

Sure, but the router will be installed downstairs, and the floor is 21 inches of high density concrete covered with porcelain tile.

tanstaafl.

But "aren't you upstairs"? "Go down, young man, go down!" said Greely. Or something like that...

-jk

Well, I suppose if you want to make it easier, just get a caulking gun and a tube of construction adhesive, and just glue the sucker up there.

I actually considered that, but the router's "feet" extend past the body of the router to provide ventilation for cooling. I would only have four small contact points to try and attach to a rough plastered ceiling. Wouldn't work.

tanstaafl.

Not even if you sanded the contact areas?

No, wouldn't work. Two or four small screws in plugs. Done. Secure.

Apparently the FCC ground rules are changing regarding unofficial router firmware

Yes, I finally got around to installing the downstairs router on the ceiling of the apartment below mine.

I found a much simpler way of sticking the router to the ceiling, one that will make most of you a bit crazy.

The router has grillwork for cooling on both the top and bottom. By holding the router up to the light, I saw that there was an area about an inch and a half square where I could see right through the middle of the router. So I drilled right through and fastened the router into the ceiling with a single moly bolt. Works great!

I got someone who knows more about networking than I (that would consist of a subset of about 90% of the total population) to configure the downstairs router. It's connected by Ethernet from one of my ports on the upstairs router, and that's about all I understand about it.

tanstaafl.

Hey, if it works, who cares? I don't think the router is going to suffer from a lack of that half inch square section of ventilation. Being on the ceiling is probably the more thermally challenging aspect, but there should be plenty of airflow around it!


There's a few ways it could be set up, but again, if it works then it doesn't matter much. The problems that could arise from an improper configuration (like double NAT) might not even have any real world ramifications.


The only hesitation I'd have about that router is that it's only 802.11g, isn't it? We've gotten to the point where 802.11ac (two generations newer) is completely affordable. Are you able to stream video through that?

Separate from any speed limitations, old and inexpensive routers tend to accumulate known and unknown unpatched security issues. Firmware updates tend to fade in frequency and eventually become unavailable.

Hacks and botnet infestations of Internet connected devices can be hard to detect after they have succeeded. Absence of router updates can allow them to remain embedded.

Straight up bugs and implementation errors can bedevil a home network for the lifetime of the old router.

I assumed that, given it's a WRT54Gx, it was running a 3rd party firmware. I probably shouldn't assume that, or that it'll get updated regularly.

Not only are newer 802.11ac APs much faster, they're also smaller and many do the auto-updating firmware thing. With your clever ceiling mount, if you could find an AP that supports power-over-Ethernet, you could end up with a very clean install.

I don't know about the WRT54Gx, but my old WRT54GL didn't get a firmware update in ages. Depending on which version of Tomato, some of them haven't been updated in years, either.

I upgraded more for the speed aspect (the new router is insanely fast compared to that old one), but I love the auto-updating firmware (until ASUS hoses a release up, I guess).

Auto-updating firmware is only good for however long the company decides to keep updating the firmware. I have an auto-updating router (a Belkin AC 1750) which hasn't had a firmware update in a couple years.

Though I have to say that it's been the most reliable wifi router I've had so far. All other routers I've had before this one would require me physically rebooting them every once in a while, this one has been really stable. Possibly because it has its own "reboot on a regular schedule" feature built-in, so I have it reboot itself daily in the wee hours.

I use the daily reboot method on the internet ‘modem’ supplied by the ISP. And also for routers that I do not trust to be be stable long term.

I install a Leviton LT113-10W timer between wall power (or UPS) and the internet modem and/or router.

Timer is set to turn on at 4:05AM and turn off at 4:01AM each day.

There is a coin battery inside so the timer clock does not reset when there is a power outage.

The remote tethered button allows someone to cycle power off and on manually, should the need arise to force a reboot of the equipment.

Simple instructions for the home owner to ‘reboot the internet’
Press the single white button and internet equipment should go dark. Wait one minute, then press button again to power it up again. Wait for internet service to resume

Regarding availability of updates for a router, choose the router based on the ability and reputation of the company to actually provide such updates. And to get it right.