Can I do this somehow if I install alternative firmware on Router A?

>>57730959
Forgot to mention routers need to be connected with WiFi. I looked for any bridging settings on router A but there's none. It's called Pentagram Cerberus P-6351

You can just do this normal. May require alt. Firmware on router b

>>57730959
Yes, this is literally what routers were designed to do.

File: Capture.png (13KB, 568x206px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 568x206px

>>57731206
Guess I won't be doing that after all

>>57730959
Post links to the hardware you have.

>>57730959
Does it connect wirelessly to your neighbor... I mean the other router?
Check out virtual wireless interfaces and if the hardware can handle multiple wireless modes at the same time. It's possible, it's called a repeater.

>>57730959
just disable dhcp

op do you not know what the fuck a router is or does other than "you plug it in and internet comes out"?

File: swan-river-pedestrian-bridge---view-from-burswood-peninsula.jpg (85KB, 1000x445px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 1000x445px

You can do it OP!

>>57731541
i've used tplink before, they work
lies

Mate, do your own fucking homework.

In fact, drop out, if this is beyond you.

>>57730959
i installed router b, a dlink, with ddwrt.
set it up as a repeater bridge.
the only downside is the bandwidth is low, like 1MB/s on the other end.

>>57730959
>Can I do this somehow if I install alternative firmware on Router A?
You dont even need alternative firmware, you just set the next hop for router B to be router A's address.

>>57730959
>>57731541
First of all your lines are retarded and your graph is hard to read/understand.

Second, you just need to set router A into client mode. Tomato firmware has client mode, not sure if ddwrt or your stock firmware have it.

>>57730959
ip helper address ThisOneHasInternet

>>57730959
Some routers can and some routers can't. None of my routers were compatible with dd-wrt but I did have one router which had WDS. It's old and it's basic so the only way computers can connect to it while it's relaying the connection wirelessly from the main router is over ethernet.

Check if your router is compatible with DD-WRT and your life will be so much easier

>>57732539
Your wireless speed is obviously going to be shitted up by at least half

There's a reason people connect their APs to their gateway via cable

>>57733349
>Some routers can and some routers can't
you're a retard who doesnt understand basic routing, you just add a route for 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 IP_of_router_A on to router B. Any fucking router is going to support static routes

>>57730959

>Installing alternate firmware

It'll work just fine as long as both routers have the routes to both network segments on their routing tables. I suggest you read up on how routers function, and networking in general.

>>57730959

I know it's a bit different, but you could connect to a with a laptop, bridge the connection, and run ethernet to router b, then connect your clients on that side wirelessly to router b.

Kinda cheesy, but it would work.

>>57730959
Am I the only one wondering why he doesn't just use a switch? Having 2 routers seems pointless unless I'm missing something.

>>57738479

He wants to steal the neighbors wireless, and use it to provide internet to his own LAN.

>>57733532
>Any fucking router is going to support static routes

haha lol no

I've dealt with way too many consumer shitboxes that couldn't do the most basic of things let alone let them fiddle with their routing tables

>>57738535
If a router has no routing tables then its not a router. A routers only purpose is to forward packets by looking up destinations in its routing table. It's basically a door stop without a routing table.

>>57738586
Most consumer "routers" are really just NAT devices coupled with an Ethernet switch and a wireless access point, maybe a simple firewall. They don't do any real routing.

If the two routers in OP's picture are connected via Ethernet (the WAN port of router A connected to one of the LAN ports of router B) it should be enough enable DHCP on the WAN port of router A. Router B's DHCP service should assign an IP configuration to router B's WAN port. Thus, router A should have internet access as a client of router B, and provide internet access to its own clients by means of its NAT.

>>57740830
Ok, I see now that the dotted line probably means that router A should be a wireless client of router B. I think it's unlikely that a simple consumer router can have its wireless interface work in both client and access point mode simultaneously.