Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[oldfogy]

I have a Netgear router with the usual 4 ports.
Is it possible to daisy-chain another router using one of the 4 ports?

Basically what's happened is I am running a energy saving trial with DEHEMS Energy Monitoring.
Of which their Data unit is now plugged into the Netgear router, and they said I could then use any of the spare sockets on the data unit for any of my own equipments.

The Data Unit is pictured at the bottom of the link below and looks just like a router with the normal feed in and 4 output sockets all of which are RJ45 connections.
http://www.dehems.eu/archives/628

Unfortunately I have not been able to connect to anything I plug into it, and don't know how to access it the same as any other router.

[geep]

I have daisy chained 2 routers and it worked reliably - configuration shown below.
No horrible latency noticed. Wireless access also worked fine.

The main modem/router was an ST546.
The 2nd router was an old Netgear FR114P - which would be equivalent the Data Unit in your setup.
I switched off the DHCP server functionaliity of the Netgear FR114P.
The PCs pick up their IP addesses via DHCP from the ST546.

  Phone Line
  |
  |
+----------------+
|  ST546          |
+----------------+
  |     |     |     |  - 4 ports
  |
  |
  |
  |   PC1 PC2 WG602
  |     |     |     |   - 4 Ports
+----------------+
|  FR114P         |
+----------------+
  |
  Internet/WAN (Not connected - see below for more details).

WG602 is a Netgear wireless access point.

I am a bit hazy about how I setup the address of the FR114P - it's 1 year since I tried it.
I think I just preset it to 192.168.1.253 - didn't get it from the ST546 via DHCP.
The default address was 192.168.0.1 - I connected via web browser to that address and changed it to 192.168.1.253.
A dump of the FR114P's .cfg file shows its address was 192.168.1.253.
I guess your Data Unit has obtained an address automatically via DHCP from your Netgear - unless you preset it.

I set the Primary DNS for the FR114P to 192.168.1.254 - that's the ST546's address.
Didn't setup a Secondary DNS.
Maybe your Data Unit has some equivalent setup, or it's automatic.

(The FR114P also has an "Internet" socket - which is used with an external modem, like a cable modem.
I also tried connecting via that socket, but had some problems - it only worked sometimes!)

(I also tested the connection between the two routers over Powerline Ethernet and it worked fine.
It's the configuration that I'll have to use if I ever get round to testing the ST546 direct to the master socket).

Can't help much with your Data Unit. If you think it's basically a router, you should figure out if it is acting as a DHCP server. You mustn't have both your Netgear and the Data Unit as DHCP servers - one or the other. Or none and assign addresses manually.

If the Data Unit has a builtin webserver perhaps you can connect to it and access some configuration parameters.
Your Netgear should tell you the address of connected devices, if you don't already know it.

Good luck,
Peter

Edit: I just watched the video http://www.dehems.eu/archives/639 where they tell you to connect your Data Unit via the WAN socket to your router.
I assume that you have done this?
You could try just connecting another cable from a LAN port on the Netgear to a LAN port on the Data Unit - at your own risk. It might stop the Data Unit from logging while the cable is connected.
If you have Wireshark http://www.wireshark.org/ you might be able to see what's talking to what on the LAN.

When I tried daisychaining via the equivalent WAN sockect on my FR114P I had some problems - it didn't work consistently. I cannot remember if I had to make any additional setup to get the Internet/WAN connector to work. As the daisychain via 1 of the 4 normal LAN ports worked fine I didn't pursue it.
On my FR114P the Internet/WAN port obtained its address of 192.168.1.64 via DHCP from the ST546.
I forced the address of the LAN ports from the default 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.1.253.

[oldfogy]

>> If the Data Unit has a builtin webserver perhaps you can connect to it and access some configuration parameters.
Your Netgear should tell you the address of connected devices, if you don't already know it.

Thanks for that, one problem at the moment is there does not seem to be any address I can access it through.
I should be able to get the info from "Dehems" but thought I would ask here first.

[roseway]

There are several complications in using two routers together. Things you need to ensure in their configuration are:

- their IP addresses are on the same subnet, but are different - e.g. 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.1.2 (only the last number is different).
- only one of the routers should be configured as a DHCP server - disable this on the other one.
- in the router which is configured as a DHCP server, make sure that its pool of addresses doesn't include the address of the other router (otherwise a connected PC might be allocated this address and there would be a conflict).
- if they are wireless routers, disable the wireless on one of them, or at least ensure that they use well separated wireless channels.

To be honest, if you need extra ethernet ports, a cheap ethernet switch would be a lot less complicated.

[HPsauce]

Is it possible to daisy-chain another router using one of the 4 ports?

In essence absolutely, that's what routers are designed to do. I've done it often.

However, you have a specialist additional unit. Sounds like it may not be configured well, or just missing documentation.
I wouldn't attempt to reconfigure it in case it stopped doing its main job.

The best solution, if you really need more ports, would be to buy a cheap switch for around £10.  

[oldfogy]

To be honest, if you need extra ethernet ports, a cheap ethernet switch would be a lot less complicated.

That sounds the best option, thanks.
(I did not know they made a ethernet switch)

Sounds like it may not be configured well, or just missing documentation.

The best solution, if you really need more ports, would be to buy a cheap switch for around £10. 

I have absolutely no documentation whatsover, and there is not even a name or any information on the unit.

So yes, when the time comes it's going to be a ethernet switch.
(which I think I already have one which was before I had a router)

*****
Thanks to everyone for all the replies.
I'm going to leave it there as it seems it might be more trouble trying to access the units settings and set the unit than it's worth, especially as it's not exactly a necessity at the moment.

[sevenlayermuddle]

The DEHEMS hardware will consume additional power, and the extra router will consume additional power, so it's not immediately obvious how it's going to lead to energy saving.  But the website contains a lot of green borders and lettering so I guess it must be a good thing.   And it's EU funded so I don't know why I ever questioned it, silly me.

Only joking of course, I guess it's just meant to help you change your habits by becoming aware of what costs what.  I'll be interested to hear how you get on, especially in winter.  Remember that your gas bill may rise as the thermostats click in, to compensate for any reduction in heat caused by electricity consumption, so keep an eye on gas bills too.

[oldfogy]

To be honest for my setup it does not actually do anything for me "except cost me more money" the reason being is that last year I went through everything that I could possibly cut down on with my electric consumption of which is now roughly 80 Kwh per month less than this time last year..
So now I have to leave the modem and now 2 routers running 24/7.

I have even stopped using my UPS's (Uninterrupted Power Supply Unit's) because of the amount of power consumed "on the off-chance of a power cut" and even turning of the modem and router when not being used which was about 12 hours per day, and also now using the laptop most of the time in the living room which means I'm not using the room where my PC systems is set up, although I miss my 2 PC's and 3 Monitor setup even when just surfing, but they can still be connected to through the network if I need either of them.

Apart from that, as I have already told Dehems, the on-line readings are far from accurate and some of the comparison charts are way off because some of them do not relate to this country, therefore a different climate and living arrangement may be being used.

As with another type of unit I recently tried, "The worry meter" is what I call it/them, simply because each time you look at it/them you keep thinking "what else can I turn off"

I also did a on-line energy survey for the WWF which said I need 2.94 planets to sustain my living habits.
I can assure you, the results were a load of rubbish.
If you want to, you can also run a "Carbon footprint test" here yourself. http://footprint.wwf.org.uk/
You will have to register, but have not received anything from them during the last month.

I won't go into details, but basically it said I should eat less, stop using the car and use less energy.
If I followed their suggestions if starvation did not kill me then hypothermia would.

[oldfogy]

Just a update on the "The Data Unit" apparently the The Data Unit is a custom built unit and only capable of carrying out it's own function regardless of how many ports it as available.
Basically it's just that the box they used had the ports built-in but may not even be connected internally.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Disappointing. 

We have a really basic British Gas branded energy consumption meter that has a mini-USB port on the back.  Imagine how disappointed and stunned I was to find it only has the power wires connected to anything.  I mean why on earth use a USB port for a power connector if the data wires are unused?  Wouldn't it make more sense to use a standard DC power jack?  The PSU was not just an "off the shelf" USB charging model either as it outputs only 100mA and USB chargers are 500+mA so that can't be the reason.

Hhow much would it cost to stick a little bit more logic in there so I can use the computer to log the data?  Being able to see how much I used last week or over the last 30 days is kinda useless without being able to itemise it down to certain days so I can see what I did that day that caused the spike in usage.  Its mostly lip service to "saving the planet" because we all know the real issue is too many coal and gas power stations, often with minimal filtering of their emissions.  Sorry but I wont be turning my PC off at night, I use it for DNS (and I am sometimes asleep when other people in the use need to use the Internet), CCTV and other stuff I use remotely when out of the house.  I never used to remember to turn it on when I leave the house and while I could upgrade it to more a energy efficient machine, that would mean buying more hardware and the carbon emitted to manufacture that equipment and recycle my old equipment prematurely.

Sometimes the best course of action is to do nothing, at least the PC is helping warm the house in the winter.  One of the few cases Top Gear were actually right, if you replace your old appliance before you normally would you are actually causing more damage because more have to be manufactured today rather than tomorrow.  Who knows what improved manufacturing and/or recycling methods may have been developed by the time you would normally upgrade, it could outweigh any benefits in reduced electricity consumption today especially if you are then tempting to prematurely upgrade AGAIN to the latest energy saving technology.  I can't help thinking 99% of energy saving advertising is just being used to mislead us into being dumb consumers, as usual.  Kinda like how the Government are cutting spending left and right today to "save money" without thinking that it will cost far more to fix the damage they are doing later.