I have two hAP ac³ routers. I have a traveling setup for robotics competitions that needs to connect to other wireless networks.
I need to run a network and access point off of one of the hAP ac³ routers (set up as HOME AP DUAL). I was hoping to hard wire that to a second hAP ac³ (set up as CPE) that would wirelessly connect to another wireless network that has an internet connection.
They seem to work in those mode separately, but if I hard wire them together I can’t get the internet access from the HOME AP DUAL ROUTER. I can get internet access by hard wiring into the CPE router with just my computer.
The question I have is that both devices will work as independent routers correct?
Hap connected to internet - gets WANIP and then provides a private IP to the second Router as the second routers WANIP: the second router is as you state established and does what it needs to do.
This should be fairly simple.
What’s the ultimate aim ?
To have a device connect to a wifi network on-site and then have connection to a device as access-point or switch ?
Both can be done with ONE device.
It’s called a road-warrior or travel router setup, I have it on mAP and mAP Lite with wireguard tunnel dialing home so I can also access home devices using those travel routers.
(obviously direct WG client on my PC/Laptop, also works for connecting to home )
Since you have hap ac3, you can dedicate one wlan for connecting to available wifi, use other wlan for private connections (or eth-ports).
No need to use virtual wlan then.
hovoeten, I suspect the setup on the second router is complex and the OP wants to separate the function of attaching to any available internet at locations with the specfic router functionlity of the second device. To this end, and seeing getting a private IP for the second router from the first router is not a problem, I see nothing wrong with the approach of separating the functionality.
If nothing else, having a known fixed working setup on the second router means that if he buggers up the config trying to connect to the internet he will not be at all messing with the other complex bits and if push comes to shove could get any consumer router to connect to the internet and feed the second router a private IP… etc…
Let me take a further look based on what you all said
This is correct.. The setup on the second router is complex and I wanted to separate the function in case anything went wrong.
With all of that said, I may try the road warrior setup anyway just to test it. It may also give me a bit more insight as to why what I am doing does not seem to work right now.
The dual router approach gives you more flexibility in that you will be able to distribute robotics connections on wifi if required as that router will not be necessarily tied up in using WIFI for internet access. Further the first router can be used to provide BOTH wired and wifi connectivity without messing with any PORT usage on the second router. Finally the second router is protected in a way by NAT and of course any firewall rules you put on the first router. Thus you can hook up to any internet and NOT worry as much about firewall rules on the second router…
This is one time I really like the idea of separating device and functionality cleanly. Sure if you are forced to make it an ALL IN ONE, then its doable. Up to you!
Another thought, the internet access may not be optimal at the site of the robotics device (aka may have to run an ethernet cable length). Thus more important to sever the functionality.
)