Master / Slave Network topology

[bajadahl]

So I have been talked into build mega trees for all my neighbors for this year.  After thinking about it for a bit I came up with the attached network topology.  Looking for feedback on if you all think this is an appropriate layout.  I think it's a pretty good setup but looking for opinions primarily over FPP and Sync packets over wireless.

Thanks,
Alan

[jnealand]

Looks good to me, but I'm not the expert.  I am looking to put a slave in my side yard and maybe another on my back deck for a few lights so this is something I also am looking at. 

What are you using to create your drawings?

[MrChristmas2000]

One quick thing I noticed that you were planning to connect router 1 to the Wan port of the second router. That connections should be to one of the LAN ports not the WAN port.

I take it that you will be configuring the second wireless router up as a access point on your network.

Are you attempting to isolate your house LAN from your Christmas LAN. If so the diagram you are using will not accomplish that.

[bajadahl]

I am just using Pages on my Mac.  Not really it's intended purpose but I think it gets the job done for simple stuff.    I know most of the networking is correct as everything except for the wireless addition is running my current show without issue.  I believe the Pi can send sync packets over the same connections as E131 which is my primary concern.  Of course my other concern is if the wireless connections become unstable.  All I can do is put it together and see if they keep their connections

[bajadahl]

Hmmmm - Ok - That's how I have it setup today and (I think) it is working the way I expect it to.  The idea is that I want the Christmas Network to be able to connect to the internet for NTP but I don't want multicast to spread to my home network which is blocked by the "Christmas router".  If I connected a LAN port on the Christmas router to a LAN port on the house router I would think that would just expand my one network.  As it stands now I have 2 subnets Christmas and Home.  The separation point is the Christmas routers outside interface.  Does that make sense? 

EDIT: Wait I think I understand your point.  The Christmas network is not isolated in that it can reach onto the home network. (The router is only there to delineate subnets,  block multicast, and give the Christmas network access to the internet for NTP.  So Yes it was always the intention for the Christmas Network to have upstream access to the home network (primarily for internet NTP access)  Now that I am adding neighbors I may want to create another layer of security just in case anyone..... not necessarily my neighbors is able to hop onto my Christmas network... They could see into my home network.   Thanks that is a good point.

One quick thing I noticed that you were planning to connect router 1 to the Wan port of the second router. That connections should be to one of the LAN ports not the WAN port.

I take it that you will be configuring the second wireless router up as a access point on your network.

Are you attempting to isolate your house LAN from your Christmas LAN. If so the diagram you are using will not accomplish that.

[bajadahl]

Ok - The fix is really already at my house.......  Instead of connecting the Christmas router to my home Router (as it is today) I just need to attach it to the ISP bridge router.  This keeps both networks isolated while allowing both access to the internet.  This will break my port forwarding setup but I don't consider that a big deal. 

[Steve Gase]

you should try the wireless network before you go too far...  see if the signal from your house (wireless router/AP) reaches to the furthest of your trees... you might need to relocate the router to the center of the neighborhood.

At the worst case you might need to implement some relays or implement a wireless grid.

you might want to identify the subnet used for your house -- just to show it is private and separate from the "moat".

[jnealand]

Alan, I ran my show exactly as you show in the first drawing.  But the home network is 192.168.0.x and the show network is 192.168.10.x.  I have a similar setup in my workshop using an old wired router that is set up as 192.168.2.x  I never noticed any degradation in my home network at all so I think your first drawing works fine.  Since the pi and show equipment are on the 10.x they should not have any access to the 0.x network without having a route setup.  But the pi can get to the internet for updates etc.  I could not access the pi from any machines that were on 0.x network.  I could take my laptop and switch to the 10.x network and control the pi.  That meant I had to do show control from the laptop and switch the wireless connection around which was a pain.  So I added an edimax wireless to the pi and configured it for a static address on the 0.x network with the eth0 on the pi being the output for the show.  That let me connect and control the pi from ANY computer on the house network by just browsing to the static address of the wireless adapter.  Worked great.  Some network engineer may find fault with it, but I like anything that just works!!!

[bajadahl]

Steve - I am actually planning to put the show router out in the middle front of my yard as close to my neighbors as possible... with repeaters at each end of my yard for the people on either side.   So I am hoping the hop across the street will be stable enough....  I am thinking 50-75' at the most to each neighbor from a wireless hot spot....

jnealand - Mine ran great this year as designed in the first drawing.  MrChristmas2000 is right in the fact that I wasn't actually blocking traffic from Christmas network to home network.  That wasn't the purpose of the original design.... It was to block multicast and so the Pi could get updates..... Now What I did do differently than you was put in a port forwarding address on my Christmas router so that from inside my home network I could open a web page and point to the Christmas router which would automatically forward my request to the FPP.  This allowed me to continue to manage the FPP from inside my house...... The only issue is, outside of actually doing it to see it work... I never really used it.  It was just as easy for me to take my laptop out to my quiet place in the garage and plug directly into the show network.  So I won't miss the port forwarding..... I never really used it.    In reality the moment I put a network out in the yard I need to attempt to limit what that network could see inside my house so I will probably try the modified network just to be as secure as possible.

Thanks for the sanity checks guys...

[David Pitts]

I used two wireless routers to bridge across the street. I had one on my side near the street in one of my power supply boxes. It was hardwired to my show network in my yard and setup as an access point (dd-wrt) then in my neighbors yard I had another setup to be client bridge (dd-wrt). Worked great.

[bajadahl]

Thanks David -  I did a little studying up on the dd-wrt firmware last night.  There is a compatible release for my old  wrt300nv1 so I think I will give it a try.  If it works I may put bridges in all my neighbors yards and hardwire the FPP's to each bridge.

[JerryPlak]

I want to second David Pitts comments on (dd-wrt)
as I have set up couple of linksys (dd-wrt)  Repeater Bridge and it Worked great for my set up, also for my home network I'm using a Netgear N600 and one  linksys (dd-wrt)  Repeater Bridge it about 45 feet away from my main Netgear router as I set up and test my controllers hook up to the repeater bridge I get good performance, on the web that are been comment that you lose speed by using a repeater, I have not found as I find my performance is better by using the repeater for it and my Wi-Fi coverage covers my home and my yard very well.

[bajadahl]

So testing continues and is going well I have to say.  Made a slight change to my setup and added a very strong wireless access point and client device for each neighbor. 

I used multisync for the first time tonight and it worked perfectly.

[nutz4lights]

So testing continues and is going well I have to say.  Made a slight change to my setup and added a very strong wireless access point and client device for each neighbor.

Alan,

Thanks for this thread.  I was wondering, based on this last post, if your diagram ended up changing at all because of the wireless access point and client device?  Can you provide the name of the items you purchased?

Thanks again for the awesome thread... I am looking to do something similar, but all in my own yard.

-Louie

[bajadahl]

First - Yes my design did indeed change a little although I haven't redrawn it.  I guess I need to put that on my list of things to do.  The major difference is that everything ends up being on the same subnet.  I am no longer relying on wifi cards or dual network configs on the FPP. 

The hardware I am using is the
Ubiquiti Picostation for the access point and Ubiquiti Nano Station LocoM2 at each client site.  This gives me gear designed for wifi handling all wifi connectivity.  I currently have 6 LocoM2's for my neighbors all connected to the Picostation.  I very happy with the setup and have been testing with almost 150 feet between the network devices. 


Alan