Do I understand correctly?

[Welty]

Modem/Router >ethernet port to Netgear switch > switch (ethernet-d) to router #2.

because:
Modem/Router uses IP 192.168.2.1

and second router 'plugged' into NOT wan, & has IP 192.168.1.1

Assume Those wifi signals could never see each other.

 

[ColinTaylor]

None of that makes any kind of sense.

 

[Welty]

OMG! How can i be more clear, or understand?

Thank You

 

[bbunge]

Modem/Router >ethernet port to Netgear switch > switch (ethernet-d) to router #2.

because:
Modem/Router uses IP 192.168.2.1

and second router 'plugged' into NOT wan, & has IP 192.168.1.1

Assume Those wifi signals could never see each other.

No, has nothing to do with WIFI. Clients connected to the 192.168.2.1 LAN router will not be able to see clients on the 2nd router with a LAN of 192.168.1.1 as the 2nd router firewall will block communication from the first router.
However, clients on the 2nd router can see and connect to clients on the 192.168.2.1 router LAN.

 

[L&LD]

You can be more clear by writing in complete sentences, conveying one meaning or idea.

I'm sure you understand. You have to use accepted constructs to allow us to do so too and possibly help.

 

[Welty]

From ISP to "modem/router", ethernet cable, to a port on "modem/router", the other end, plugs into 2nd 'router' Let's call "modem/router" #1 & second "Router" #2, #1's ethernet cable goes to #2's port

#1 ISP supplied modem router, uses IP 192.168.2.1
#2 Netgear ac, uses IP 192.168.1.1

Upstairs Netgear connected no dead spots, join #1's network upstairs 'weak' signal.

A bell installer switched #2's config. to ethernet cable to "LAN" port, by re-config #2 brought about previously unseen issues. I believe his switching caused wifi issues or conflict with wifi signals