Brazil was plagued with many el-cheapo routers that did not support it... and even with some later equipment it can be troublesome. I could not, for the life of me, get WDS to work reliably between an Apple Airport (main AP) and a TP-Link router. A bunch of stuff simply refused to work then. From what I remember reading in OpenWRT's wiki the best bet to get WDS working well was that both routers had compatible Broadcom/Atheros/whatever chips. Also, Apple Airports only like other Airports because Apple - it was not mine, mind you, as I would not waste my time with Apple stuff in a network filled with Windows machines. I instructed him to buy one of those wall socket extenders that had one of the bridging options that worked fine, but could not use the same SSID for the secondary WiFi (WDS still did not work correclty)

The way I do it at home with OpenWRT/DD-WRT is foolproof and works with any combination of routers I can imagine. First I give it a non-conflicting fixed IP, then set it up as a Wireless client (and keep it in LAN instead of WAN) , and finally disable DHCP, so the router gets reduced to bridging its switch and the WiFi network. Then, if needed, I set up the secondary modem as an AP so it will also provide a secondary WiFi network). There's more than one way to skin a cat ^^

IMHO for the OP the easiest way to proceed is to get a cheap wall socket "range extender" with a single RJ45 port. Those things are usually made with every bridging option possible so something should work.

According to my limited experience, there are routers (sometimes even cheap ones) with every option available (works as a router, or wireless bridge, or wired bridge, or access point) and there are routers, sometimes even expensive ones, that can only do the router thing and nothing else.

Here is my setup:

As you can see, the second router is setup as a wired/wireless access point and a wired bridge. But it is not possible to set it up as a wireless bridge.

The modem/router that at the moment I use as a lean modem, a popular local brand called Airties, can do everything, including wireless bridge mode (my previous setup had a similar Airties instead of WUMC710, as a wireless bridge).

You don't need WDS. You need a router that can use client mode. WDS is a low performance way to extend WIFI coverage, akin to using a WIFI extender.

Sorry CU_AMiGA. I did not mean to open a 55 gallon can of worms just making a suggestion.
If you find the branching of the discussion bothersome the mods can split it into it's own topic.
You just need to ask them.
.

TP-Link was mentioned earlier.
I bought one of those (granted it is a wired router) several years ago specifically to test it's long term reliability.
At about 1 year old it started getting flaky, dropping connections or locking up.
I replaced the cheap original caps with Panasonic FC or FR (don't recall which) and after that it has run 24/7 for 3+ years without a single problem.
The 'upgrade' cost something less than $3.
.

Sedrosken wrote:

As far as I know, there is no such animal. By the time WiFi cards were a thing the PC industry was completely onto Windows XP and 3.3v PCI. Your Pentium (to my knowledge) has 5v PCI slots. Only a bare few WLAN cards ever supported 9x at all.

Wrong. WiFi cards existed LONG before Windows even came along. The Proxim RangeLAN cards came out originally on the ISA bus in 1992! Later, they introduced both PCI and PCMCIA versions. These cards were supported under DOS (even with just a lowly 8086), then Win 3.1, and later Win9x and all the others. I designed an embedded version of their original ISA card in 1993. Granted, they only support 802.11b, but WiFi predates Windows (and PCI) by a big margin...

Logistics wrote:

There's also the option of serial WiFi. Yes, it's slow.

hhhmmm interesting. Never knew such a thing existed! Would this be slower or faster than the Cisco Aironet 350 PCI?

mockingbird wrote:

Now, assuming we're using a PC in a remote location that will only be using a Wired LAN card conected to this router, this second router needs to be set up in a way that it is treating the existing WiFi connection as it's WAN. This option does not exist on routers. There is no setting that takes existing WiFi networks, connects to them, and then uses the DHCP IP as its own internet source.

Sure there is - I'm using one right now. It's called a "Range Extender". Just a plain 'ol router that takes its WAN source from existing WiFi rather than wired. Creates its own subnets on both WiFi and wired from the pre-existing WiFi source.

alexanrs wrote:

Brazil was plagued with many el-cheapo routers that did not support it... and even with some later equipment it can be troublesome. I could not, for the life of me, get WDS to work reliably between an Apple Airport (main AP) and a TP-Link router. A bunch of stuff simply refused to work then. From what I remember reading in OpenWRT's wiki the best bet to get WDS working well was that both routers had compatible Broadcom/Atheros/whatever chips. Also, Apple Airports only like other Airports because Apple - it was not mine, mind you, as I would not waste my time with Apple stuff in a network filled with Windows machines. I instructed him to buy one of those wall socket extenders that had one of the bridging options that worked fine, but could not use the same SSID for the secondary WiFi (WDS still did not work correclty)

The way I do it at home with OpenWRT/DD-WRT is foolproof and works with any combination of routers I can imagine. First I give it a non-conflicting fixed IP, then set it up as a Wireless client (and keep it in LAN instead of WAN) , and finally disable DHCP, so the router gets reduced to bridging its switch and the WiFi network. Then, if needed, I set up the secondary modem as an AP so it will also provide a secondary WiFi network). There's more than one way to skin a cat ^^

IMHO for the OP the easiest way to proceed is to get a cheap wall socket "range extender" with a single RJ45 port. Those things are usually made with every bridging option possible so something should work.

I never said the firmware trick doesn't work.
I said it's not -required- and showed an easy alternative.
.
All the firmware mod actually does is allow software access to 'switches' that configure the IC chips in the router.
The firmware mod does not change the IC chips in the router - the 'switches' and functions are already there.
In my experience said 'switching' is already available using the factory firmware.
.
The only real difference between what you do and what I do is that we use different means to flip switches.
.

OregonJim wrote:

Sedrosken wrote:

As far as I know, there is no such animal. By the time WiFi cards were a thing the PC industry was completely onto Windows XP and 3.3v PCI. Your Pentium (to my knowledge) has 5v PCI slots. Only a bare few WLAN cards ever supported 9x at all.

Wrong. WiFi cards existed LONG before Windows even came along. The Proxim RangeLAN cards came out originally on the ISA bus in 1992! Later, they introduced both PCI and PCMCIA versions. These cards were supported under DOS (even with just a lowly 8086), then Win 3.1, and later Win9x and all the others. I designed an embedded version of their original ISA card in 1993. Granted, they only support 802.11b, but WiFi predates Windows (and PCI) by a big margin...

I believe you.
In the mid 90's when 486's cost ~$1100 I don't think a lot of home users (or even small business's) cared to have swarms of PCs around to network so they just never explored networking in detail.
.

gdjacobs wrote:

You don't need WDS. You need a router that can use client mode. WDS is a low performance way to extend WIFI coverage, akin to using a WIFI extender.

WDS is more common than "client mode" in routers. In this particular case - would there really be a difference in performance? How much?

If WDS is bridging to another wireless device, I would expect less than 50% (TX and RX for every packet, less overhead). I would expect some overhead as the router listens for clients, but if there are only wired devices connected it should be closer to client mode. Maybe worth a test...

What about something like this? http://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-Universal-Ether … 1/dp/B003KPBRRW

It's basically a "universal" adapter that converts an ethernet connection into wifi (basically the opposite of an AP). No drivers needed on the computer, all configuration is done using the adapter itself. You would likely need to connect it to a modern system first to configure it (Simple browser-based GUI), but once that's done it's plug & play on the older system. This would pretty much guarantee even the oldest of computers could connect to modern wifi regardless of what other peripherals it can and cannot support, as long as it at least has a functional ethernet port and an OS with TCP/IP support.

torindkflt wrote:

What about something like this? http://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-Universal-Ether … 1/dp/B003KPBRRW

That would work if the one of the 802.11 versions it uses is compatible.
That is exactly what we were doing with router 'tricks' but that thing only has one hardwire port. The router would probably provide 4 or even more.
To connect to multiple hardwire devices to the WNCE2001 one would additionally need a hardwire router.

torindkflt wrote:

(basically the opposite of an AP).

It is an AP. They just came up with catchy name for it.
APs are two way devices 'out both ends'. There isn't really a backwards except in peoples minds.
The router tricks are indeed using an AP "backwards" compared to how they are usually used.
I think that's why some people got confused.
.

torindkflt wrote:

What about something like this? http://www.amazon.com/NETGEAR-Universal-Ether … 1/dp/B003KPBRRW

Should work. And would perhaps be better than an old non-802.11n router.

OK just a bit of an update. The wifi connections i will be using are 802.11g/n. So the older cards mentioned earlier that only connect to the old 802.11g/n standard would be no use to me. So that NETGEAR Universal N300 connect to an ethernet port on the PC would be a go-er. Does this device exist in the UK? I can only see it being sold on US ebay/amazon sites.

I guess the UK ppl are still getting over their hangovers.

Amazing! Can only seem to find this device on US sites, and there is no other equivalent! 😳 Maybe i can buy one and use a 5v UK power supply. Anyone know of a decent PCI ethernet card that would work within Windows 98se and a Pentium 1? 🤣

I am pretty sure the $10 Rosewill pci wifi card I bought on Newegg will work under 98se and on a P1. Let me track down the specs online and get back to you. EDIT: Just checked and could not find a minimum system recommendation but can confirm 98se drivers to be available. Rosewill RNX-G300LX is the model.

hhhmmm just had a look at it.... got a feeling it would require greater than a Pentium and would use PCI 2. (I'm guessing i have an older version)