Success with Netgear WGU624, not with WG602v3
[link|http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProductDesc.asp?description=33-122-060&depa=0|WGU624] at newegg.com. Netgear WGU624 is a 802.11g and 802.11a wireless router with a 4+1 port 10/100 switch.
I have a Motorola SB5100 cable modem that fed a D-Link 704p Router/Switch. It supplies DHCP for subsequent PCs on the network. It was at 192.168.0.1 It connected to a Linksys BEFW11S4V3 that just acted as a 802.11b WAP. Its address was 192.168.0.200. I then have a D-Link DWL-810+ that is used as a 802.11b wireless bridge at 192.168.0.30
The plan was to replace just the BEFW11S4V3 and the 810+ with 802.11g parts, thinking that the replacement would be drop-ins. Well, the setups are sufficiently different that I've spent about 5 hours fighting with it so far. The distinction between the Internet IP address and the LAN IP address bit me for a while (since the router sits between the cable network and the local network, it's apparent that the Internet IP address is the one supplied by the ISP, but I was just blindly trying to match up previous settings without carefully reading). Also, the 624 came set with its local IP address as 192.168.1.1, so some trickery had to be done to connect to it and change the local IP address to present subnet.
I ended up going SB5100 -> WGU624 without the 704P. It's probably better that way - it'll save some electricity anyway. But I should have been able to just pull out the WAP it seems to me...
Anyway, so far I'm not impressed with the ease of setting this thing up, it's certainly not something that you can just plug in and have work, but it seems to work fine once it's happy with its settings.
Next I have to get the Netgear [link|http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?description=33-122-013&depa=1|WG602v3] WAP working as a bridge. In my trying to figure it out last night it seems that it requires the MAC addresses of the WAPs that you want to connect to. The 810+ was trivial to use as a bridge - it has a button to sniff out available WAPs and read their MACs (though I never figured out how to use it as a repeater). We'll see how it goes. (At least it came configured on the 192.168.0.x subnet.)
In short, don't use me as an example of how "easy" it is to upgrade a wireless network. But the WGU624 seems to work fine. (I haven't upgraded the firmware - V1.0.1.7.EN)
It's a shame that the WGT624 gave you problems, Peter.
Win2k, Mozilla 1.7.x, cable modem.
[edit:] I misrememberd some part numbers above, added the following:
I upgraded the firmware on the WGU624 but haven't noticed any difference.
The firmware on the WG602v3 is the latest/final version V1.0.4. It looks like it would work fine as a WAP, but it does not work with the WGU624 as a bridge. I spent most of the afternoon and evening trying to get it to work without success. I've seen annecdotal reports that the WG602 only works as a bridge with another copy of itself, but that report seems to have been for an earlier version of the 602. I've sent an e-mail to Netgear asking if there's a way to get the two working together.
The 810+ works fine as a bridge with the WGU624, but of course the 810+ is only an 802.11b part so I'm losing some speed.
The WGU624 works fine with my T41 and with my wife's old Ti Powerbook G4. I only had to enter the new SSID name and reenter the 128-bit WAP key. Pretty painless, once the WGU624 was working.
I may be returning the WG602v3 (and probably getting a D-Link or Linksys 802.11g bridge), or may hang on to it as a WAP for the basement if I ever get around to running CAT5 cable. At the moment it is not recommended if you're looking for a 802.11g bridge.
I'll make further updates here if/when things change.
[edit2:] I got an e-mail back from Netgear today.
I understand the concern and appreciate the oppurtunity to assist you . WG602v3 ca not make a wireless bridge with the router . This feature is not supported .
I hope this will resolve the issue if you have any further issues please revert back.
It, and most likely the WGU624 will be going back to newegg. I had to powercycle the WGU624 again this morning. It seems to have difficulty staying up for more than 6 hours. Unacceptable. Peter's [link|http://www.buffalotech.com/products/product-detail.php?productid=11&categoryid=6|Buffalo] is sounding very appealing...
Cheers,
Scott.
