R2 and AP mode...

[TheFx1]

Just a quick one for the netduma team...

 

Is there an AP mode in R2, I convinced myself to get an R2, hoping to be able to test all the new features and check that they are working in my environment...

And as such I need to put the R2 in AP like mode, I cannot afford to disrupt my network with the XR500 at the heart of my internet access. And as such, I need at least for now to cascade things in that order: modem->XR500->Extender->R2 (AP)-> my network so that the R2 acts as an access point which gives me all the luxury of testing on my network without disrupting any other operations running on it (sadly I do more on my network than gaming). And then moving along the line to see if they work or not. 

I know I could do a R2 accessing the XR500 as an ISP via config but it'll add NAT on top of it. And I'd rather have the XR500 handling the majority of the traffic and load rather than the R2.

Also can I do VLANs on the LAN (I didn't find how to)?

Best regards,

FX.

 

[Fuzy]

28 minutes ago, TheFx1 said:

Just a quick one for the netduma team...

 

Is there an AP mode in R2, I convinced myself to get an R2, hoping to be able to test all the new features and check that they are working in my environment...

And as such I need to put the R2 in AP like mode, I cannot afford to disrupt my network with the XR500 at the heart of my internet access. And as such, I need at least for now to cascade things in that order: modem->XR500->Extender->R2 (AP)-> my network so that the R2 acts as an access point which gives me all the luxury of testing on my network without disrupting any other operations running on it (sadly I do more on my network than gaming). And then moving along the line to see if they work or not. 

I know I could do a R2 accessing the XR500 as an ISP via config but it'll add NAT on top of it. And I'd rather have the XR500 handling the majority of the traffic and load rather than the R2.

Also can I do VLANs on the LAN (I didn't find how to)?

Best regards,

FX.

 

I advise you to put the XR500 in AP and the R2 at the heart of your network ...

You will have better wifi speed with the XR in AP mode and a better experience with faster updates from the R2.

That's what I did !

 

[Netduma Fraser]

There is no AP mode currently available, the suggestion above would be the best solution. You could do your setup with it in router mode, just put the R2 WAN IP in the XR500 DMZ.

[Fuzy]

16 minutes ago, Fuzy said:

I advise you to put the XR500 in AP and the R2 at the heart of your network ...

You will have better wifi speed with the XR in AP mode and a better experience with faster updates from the R2.

That's what I did !

 

@TheFx1 

After all, it depends on your connection speeds.

If it does not exceed 300/300 Mbps ... the R2 will do the job alone!

[TheFx1]

I agree that the XR500 gives better speed and that is exactly why I need the XR500 to be the first point, because it delivers wifi not only to one extender but to two that are in opposition, I wish I could wire everything in Cat 6 but this is not an option right now.

Also that does not answer my question: is there an AP mode in the R2? 

In the configuration I wrote down in my original email, the XR500 would handle 75 % of the traffic (I have something like 30+ network devices) and the R2 25%.

In the proposed configuration the R2 will handle 75% and the XR500 25% less than ideal knowing that in normal operations the cores of the XR500 are both on average above 75% utilisation without the use of Hybrid VPN and I will need to add some port triggering on the R2 to allow VPN in on the XR500 as I didn't find anything in the configuration of R2 for a VPN in, as I say I do a bit more than gaming on my home network especially during the current times.

 

 

 

 

 

[TheFx1]

27 minutes ago, Netduma Fraser said:

There is no AP mode currently available, the suggestion above would be the best solution. You could do your setup with it in router mode, just put the R2 WAN IP in the XR500 DMZ.

Right...

So I would then have a double NAT wouldn't I? And to some extend everything serviced by the R2 would not be directly available from the remainder of the network because of NAT unless I play around with port triggering and all. 

Any plan of having an AP mode in the R2 ? 

 

[TheFx1]

9 minutes ago, Fuzy said:

@TheFx1 

After all, it depends on your connection speeds.

If it does not exceed 300/300 Mbps ... the R2 will do the job alone!

I agree with you, but I am not only talking about internet connection here, I am also talking host to host.

[Netduma Fraser]

39 minutes ago, TheFx1 said:

Right...

So I would then have a double NAT wouldn't I? And to some extend everything serviced by the R2 would not be directly available from the remainder of the network because of NAT unless I play around with port triggering and all. 

Any plan of having an AP mode in the R2 ? 

With the R2 in the DMZ you shouldn't have an issue with NAT. I will request to the devs that AP mode be added.

[TheFx1]

23 minutes ago, Netduma Fraser said:

With the R2 in the DMZ you shouldn't have an issue with NAT. I will request to the devs that AP mode be added.

True ish... let's say I have two hosts behind the R2 (a and b) and they both have a web interface (this is just an example, could be ssh, or any other port) and one host on the XR500 needs to access either a or b... DMZ or not would not play a role and I would not be able to access these host either by IP or by name unless I put some port triggering in the R2.

 

Thanks a lot for the AP mode request, really appreciate it.

 

 

[LegionGaming]

Is there any update  on the progress regarding AP mode?

Thanks in advance!

[Bert]

On 8/11/2020 at 8:58 PM, Netduma Fraser said:

With the R2 in the DMZ you shouldn't have an issue with NAT. I will request to the devs that AP mode be added.

Actually you will have an issue with NAT if you want stuff on both devices talking together.

 

Because the R2 firewill will still be running. I tried this as well with 2 different subnets (I tried it with a XR500 and a R1 but the models you mix don't really matter here). DMZ gets yout through the XR500 firewill to the R2, but the R2 firewall will block traffic from hosts connected to the XR500 thinking it's traffic coming from WAN.

 

So you would get for example:

XR500 subnet 192.168.1.0/24

R2 Subnet 192.168.10.0/24

 

You enter a static route in the XR500 pointing the 192.168.10.0/24 subnet to the R2's WAN IP.

 

This works going up, the R2 clients can acces hosts serviced by the XR500 but not the other way around. You can ping the R2 but it ends there.

 

That's how I came up with the dual WAN style setup I mentioned in the other topic lol. That would also work with a R2 and a XR500 but if you have a lot of clients it's a lot of configuration work.

 

Also I would not replace a XR500 as main router with a R2, XR500 is a more powerful unit. Also in my opinion from the whole scala of Netduma routers available at the moment the XR500 is the most stable running one. From XR series is's probably also the best supported one.

[Bert]

Didn't realize it was a old discussion doh.

[Netduma Fraser]

50 minutes ago, LegionGaming said:

Is there any update  on the progress regarding AP mode?

Thanks in advance!

I haven't heard anything, it's unlikely this will be prioritized given you'll be unable to use any of the features

[Alias 1aB]

As someone else said, I have been running the R2 as my main router and using a TP-LINK AX1800 router as an access point. I turn the wireless radios on the R2 completely off as I have only 8 devices that connect wirelessly (laptop, 4 tablets, 2 phones, and amazon echo) never more than 4 at a time though and everything thing else in hardwired Cat6 (9 devices) with the use of a couple of unmanaged ethernet switches. I have had no issues using the R2 ever since I disabled the wireless radios on the device. Worked just fine as primary router by offloading wireless capability.

On a side note, doesn't the XR500 still have a beta version of DumaOS 3.0? or are some still using 2.0 because 3.0 is SO MUCH better than 2.0 if you can get past some of the bugs in the routers that have DumaOS 3.0. Its the main reason I got rid of my XR450 and went for the R2.

[Netduma Fraser]

7 hours ago, Alias 1aB said:

As someone else said, I have been running the R2 as my main router and using a TP-LINK AX1800 router as an access point. I turn the wireless radios on the R2 completely off as I have only 8 devices that connect wirelessly (laptop, 4 tablets, 2 phones, and amazon echo) never more than 4 at a time though and everything thing else in hardwired Cat6 (9 devices) with the use of a couple of unmanaged ethernet switches. I have had no issues using the R2 ever since I disabled the wireless radios on the device. Worked just fine as primary router by offloading wireless capability.

On a side note, doesn't the XR500 still have a beta version of DumaOS 3.0? or are some still using 2.0 because 3.0 is SO MUCH better than 2.0 if you can get past some of the bugs in the routers that have DumaOS 3.0. Its the main reason I got rid of my XR450 and went for the R2.

Glad to hear that! Some people do continue to use 2.0 as they are wary of beta versions but in my opinion it's fairly stable, highly unlikely to cause any major issues.