1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice

Welcome To SNBForums

SNBForums is a community for anyone who wants to learn about or discuss the latest in wireless routers, network storage and the ins and outs of building and maintaining a small network.

If you'd like to post a question, simply register and have at it!

While you're at it, please check out SmallNetBuilder for product reviews and our famous Router Charts, Ranker and plenty more!

WAN --> LAN Subnet Eating Bandwidth?

Discussion in 'Routers' started by PinkFloydEffect, Apr 13, 2020.

  1. PinkFloydEffect

    PinkFloydEffect Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    81
    I can not seem to figure out why that a router would eat or constrict bandwidth. I setup a subnet on a basic old TPLINK router, using a mesh range extender with Ethernet for the WAN and my desktop connected to the LAN. This allows me to pickup a WiFi signal and redistribute it on a subnet. With the mesh range extender connected directly to my desktop it provides a stable 200Mbps connection, but when I run it through the router my bandwidth drops to around 100Mbps however the latency remains low. It may be a 7-8 year old router but it says Gigabit right on it, and the bandwidth is not dropping to 100Mbps flat but around 115Mbps. I am using a static IP on the WAN side and DHCP on the LAN. The mesh range extender is also set up with a static IP, and the Ethernet port is set to auto because there is no static option just auto-on-off for DHCP.

    I used the first IP on my core network for the mesh range extender (192.168.254.1) and the routers WAN is set to 192.168.254.2 which is next in the pool. Granted I do not have permission to reserve IPs on the core I figured I would experiment to see if it ever gave away my IPs. Maybe using the last IPs in the pool would have been a better idea? The gateway is 192.168.254.254 so maybe using .253 would be safer than .1 if anyone can confirm?

    Any ideas? I do not think the static IPs are the problem.
     
  2. Callinc

    Callinc Occasional Visitor

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages:
    39
    Just so I understand this correctly the WiFi extender is wirelessly bridge to your main router. You then have a hard wire coming out of that into an only wireless router? If that’s true does the wireless bridge broadcast its own WiFi? If so you could be having WiFi interference if you have two WiFi broadcasters mere feet from each other.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  3. PinkFloydEffect

    PinkFloydEffect Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    81
    Yes you are correct, and no that is not the problem. I disabled the WiFi radio to test that theory and it made no difference. As a minor of fact, the mesh extender has a built in fronthaul AP which is even closer than my secondary WiFi router (even though I have the fronthaul disabled its the concept).

    I am almost certain it just does not support true Gigabit through the WAN, so I ordered a cheap $50 WiFi router to replace it that clearly states it has a full Gigabit capable LAN and WAN. I will use this to create the subnet, and also utilize the WiFi. It may not be great WiFi for $50 but all I use WiFi for is my phone on 2.4GHz
     
  4. Callinc

    Callinc Occasional Visitor

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2019
    Messages:
    39
    That could work. The other thing you could try are MoCA adapters (if you have cable near by) or power line adapters.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  5. PinkFloydEffect

    PinkFloydEffect Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    81
  6. MichaelCG

    MichaelCG Very Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2017
    Messages:
    710
    Location:
    Central US
    My guess is you are hitting the CPU limit for routing on that old device. It may be "gigabit" but that was more marketing terms in older devices since the ports could link up, and maybe the switch portion could get close, but to route traffic required use of the CPU which may not have been up to the task. Even modern home routers may struggle with true 1Gbps routing.

    As for your topic on IPs, that won't define your speeds. As for DHCP conflicts, you need to confirm with the landlord's router on what the DHCP pool is. You can take your best guess, but that is not something you are in control of. Your bridge device shouldn't need a static IP in the first place. It just needs to participate in the core network as a client.
     
    PinkFloydEffect likes this.
  7. PinkFloydEffect

    PinkFloydEffect Regular Contributor

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2018
    Messages:
    81
    I am hoping the TP-LINK Archer A6 I just ordered is up to the task. I don't need 1Gbps of throughput, but I do need a solid 200Mbps of routing.

    The reason I set my bridge device to static is so that I can log into it without the need to check the client list in my landlords router for the IP every time I need to log into the bridge device.