Two routers, 1 Windows?

Okay, but that is 3 pieces of extra kit that I need to buy. Wouldn't one switch into the back of the oringal router give me more performance?
Or... About.com says http://compnetworking.about.com/od/r...wo_routers.htm some interesting stuff. And I know it talks about switches at the end, but if what your saying is right, I'd need more kit and there would still be some strain on the 1st router.

You can add several switches if you want.

Or just 1 and no WAC?

WAC? Did you mean WAP? You already have that.

As for the number of switches, that depends on the switch. Most have 4 or 8 ports, unless you go to business class.

To make you home network more secure go to your routers home web page and disable SSID broadcast. To do this; type in the 192.168.x.x into your browsers main search bar. The one at the very top. This will turn off your routers broadcast signal that others might pick up and piggy back on.

To solve your intermittent drop outs, try changing you wireless channel. There are 10 or 11 channels to try. Just go right down the list. You could have some interference with some other household device using the same frequency such as microwaves, wireless home phones. Anything that runs at the 2.4 GHz frequency. The location of your router in relation to such devices may also play a part in the drop outs.

Maybe it's because it's so early in the morning, but I'm confused now.

His network, from what I understand, supports 14 clients, of which only three are wired, and the rest (eleven) are wireless. He is concerned that the wireless traffic from eleven wireless clients on top of the wired traffic is becoming a bit more than one router can handle, ie overheating, laggy performance, etc. I think what he is asking is if adding a second router would take some of the load off from the first one, improving network stability and performance, and maybe extending the life-cycle of the router.

Obviously he doesn't need another firewall/gateway/dhcp server, but if he extends his network with an 8-port switch, what is he going to plug into those ports? He only has three wired clients, which aren't the problem.

I'm not an expert on routers by any means, but are these 40-dollar home routers, which he presumably has, built to handle concurrent traffic from 14 clients? (Then again another router in bridged mode isn't really going to do more than direct that traffic to the first one anyhow)

I did notice his router, according to that pic, is a Wireless-G, and not a Wireless-N, which certainly doesn't help.

 -o)
 /\\    Message void if penguin violated
_\_V    Don't mess with the penguin

Unless he has two "points of presence" or POPs (two ISP connections) all the traffic is being shoved into one tiny pipe anyway at the gateway device (modem). The router can handle about 254 devices.

As far as traffic, it is not likely all connected devices are moving lots of data onto or off the Internet at once. If they are, then NO home router or home gateway device will be able to keep up and it is time to invest in some business class network hardware and it is time to pay the ISP for a bigger pipe.

But if we are talking local network traffic, then go with a 1Gb LAN.

If the concern is simply about the wireless devices, then as Core correctly notes, straddling wireless access to 11g is not helping - especially if the network also includes some 11n devices. Mixing protocols on the same wireless network ALWAYS bogs down wireless access - unless you specifically buy a "Simultaneous Dual-Band" wireless access device. Not just "Dual-Band", but Simultaneous Dual-Band".

This really has no effect on security as it will not keep out even the most amateurish wannabe hacker. All disabling SSID broadcasting does is keep the nosy neighbor whiz kid from seeing that you have a network when he searches for "hotspots", then running through your kid's or dog's names trying to guess the passphrase. The fact of the matter is, whether disabled or not, the SSID is transmitted in clear text in the packet stream so any wannabe with a scanner and easily available sniffer software can see it anyway! So disabling it actually becomes an inconvenience for legitimate users wanting connect a new device while providing absolutely no protection from someone seeking to gain unauthorized access.

Myth vs. reality: Wireless SSIDs

Service set (802.11 network)

Amen to that

I see the point of confusion. The last post on the previous page by Digerati, which actually explained everything (and the fact that it's 4 in 1! ), I missed because I simply clicked on the link in my most recent email regarding the thread. Oops!

We already have our SSID to non-broadcasting, just to make sure no pesky neighbours get inventive!

Yes, the Belkin router is only a wireless G, which isn't good, but for reasons too complicated to do with the house we can't move it into any position other than it's current.

Someone mentioned that my network setup could be router, 2 switches and a wireless access point, hence my mentioning of WAP.

Bassfisher, other users in the house aren't having problems, it's just the big games rig that's struggling. A it's far away, and B the MW2 servers are rubbish So no channel changing.

I think I've cleared up nearly everything now. Our 1 8mb POP is a phone line with and ADSL filter on it. Would the switch/router take any strain off it at all?

Again, what is WAC?

No. Again, once the data streams from all the machines hit the gateway device, you are going out on one pipe and that's a big (tiny!) bottleneck.

Well, certainly location, location, location is a significant factor for any wireless network. You can always add another WAP - this one for your 11n devices and that will help share the load on your network side - but again, once you hit your gateway device, you are limited by its capabilities, and the size of your pipe (amount of bandwidth) you are paying for.

Did I see WAC? I meant WAP...

Would a switch be a WAP, or would it have to be a router?