Network Conflict - Newbie Needs Advice

IIRC the main Eero has 2 ports. 1 for WAN which should go from the pod to the Modem. 1 marked LAN which is for adding more Pods.

Get a gigabit switch and plug it in to the LAN port of the first Eero then plug everything in to the switch.

When you plugged the camera into the Rogers modem, the Eero mesh and the camera are both fighting for the one IP address. I agree with tebore to use a Switch.

Rogers modem -> Eero mesh -> switch -> everthing else

ds2chan wrote: ↑ When you plugged the camera into the Rogers modem, the Eero mesh and the camera are both fighting for the one IP address. I agree with tebore to use a Switch.

Rogers modem -> Eero mesh -> switch -> everthing else

Thanks, I figured that was the solution but given the modem is in the basement and the hardwired Eero is on the main floor it's a bit of a pain to introduce the switch as I then have to run another network cable from the basement rack to the pod on the main floor. I was hoping to avoid doing this.

I take it I can't plug the switch into the modem and then feed the Eero from one of the ports on the switch?

The_Professor wrote: ↑ Thanks, I figured that was the solution but given the modem is in the basement and the hardwired Eero is on the main floor it's a bit of a pain to introduce the switch as I then have to run another network cable from the basement rack to the pod on the main floor. I was hoping to avoid doing this.

I take it I can't plug the switch into the modem and then feed the Eero from one of the ports on the switch?

Yes and no.
You can use the modem as you propose and just set the Eero as dumb AP. This leaves your modem as the gateway (the brain) of the network losing out on the advanced features of the Eero.

If you don't set the Eero as a dumb AP you'll end up with 2 networks that don't talk to each other which might be ok (the Envisalink and NVR shouldn't need to be seen on LAN, I'm assuming you're using apps). But when it comes to gaming or anything on the Eero side your Double NAT might create an issue.

I'm not a fan of either setup.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ Thanks, I figured that was the solution but given the modem is in the basement and the hardwired Eero is on the main floor it's a bit of a pain to introduce the switch as I then have to run another network cable from the basement rack to the pod on the main floor. I was hoping to avoid doing this.

I take it I can't plug the switch into the modem and then feed the Eero from one of the ports on the switch?

No you cant plug switch into modem and have it feed both the camera and the Eero if only single IP is the problem. Cause that'll be the same as your current setup of plugging them both into the modem.

If you can get the modem out of Bridge mode you can try and see what happens and how it affects your speed/operations. I've had my internet setup without bridge mode while hooked up to my own router for a few years now. Aside from xbox double NAT notice I've had no other issue with internet. Even with double NAT games still worked fine online.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ Thanks, I figured that was the solution but given the modem is in the basement and the hardwired Eero is on the main floor it's a bit of a pain to introduce the switch as I then have to run another network cable from the basement rack to the pod on the main floor. I was hoping to avoid doing this.

I take it I can't plug the switch into the modem and then feed the Eero from one of the ports on the switch?

Can you move the Eero mesh into the basement then? Use a wireless extender where you had the Eero mesh.

Rogers modem -> move Eero mesh to be beside Rogers modem -> wireless extender -> everything else

I don't do any gaming, just streaming of Netflix, Disney+, etc. I do have a lot of Wi'Fi devices in the home though (thermostat, Alexa, appliances, etc.) but if they're all set up to work on the Eero network then even if the Rogers modem is broadcasting a separate network it shouldn't matter, should it?

At the end of the day I want to do whatever is right, but if simply taking the Rogers modem out of bridge mode can work without any negative effect elsewhere then that'd be my preference simply because it's so easy to do.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ I don't do any gaming, just streaming of Netflix, Disney+, etc. I do have a lot of Wi'Fi devices in the home though (thermostat, Alexa, appliances, etc.) but if they're all set up to work on the Eero network then even if the Rogers modem is broadcasting a separate network it shouldn't matter, should it?

At the end of the day I want to do whatever is right, but if simply taking the Rogers modem out of bridge mode can work without any negative effect elsewhere then that'd be my preference simply because it's so easy to do.

A lot of VoIP or telecom applications don't like double NAT or it introduces extra latency. That's going to be the highest impact during this WFH period if you don't game.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ I don't do any gaming, just streaming of Netflix, Disney+, etc. I do have a lot of Wi'Fi devices in the home though (thermostat, Alexa, appliances, etc.) but if they're all set up to work on the Eero network then even if the Rogers modem is broadcasting a separate network it shouldn't matter, should it?

At the end of the day I want to do whatever is right, but if simply taking the Rogers modem out of bridge mode can work without any negative effect elsewhere then that'd be my preference simply because it's so easy to do.

It sounds like you're asking if you change the Rogers modem from bridge mode back to router mode will it work. It shouldn't work because your Eero mesh is a router too. You can't have 2 routers on the same network. So, if you change the Rogers modem back to a router then you'll have to configure the Eero mesh to be an access point (I assume this is doable for mesh systems).

OP, I have a similar set up as you (Rogers internet, Eero mesh, EyezOn Envisalink module). The question you should ask yourself is whether you want to keep using the features/functions offered by the Eero mesh router (e.g. managing you devices through the Eero app, ability to pause internet for individual devices, port forwarding/IP assignments via Eero app, etc.) If you have no desire/need to manage your home network beyond the initial setup and configuration, then using the Rogers modem as your main modem (switching it back to non-bridge mode), then introducing an unmanaged gigabit switch behind the modem and connect all your devices to it (including the hardwired Eero pod from your main floor) would be the cheapest and easiest solution. A good gigabit switch with 8 ports is around $20 (I'm assuming you don't need this switch to be PoE-compatible... if it does then it will cost more).

If you do want to keep using the Eero app to configure and run your home network, then you need to introduce a second Eero pod behind the modem to be your "gateway Eero", then your Eero pod on the main floor can continue to be a Eero node with a hard-wired backhaul, which is the best way to set up your nodes anyway. You will still need an unmanaged gigabit switch to go behind the gateway Eero.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ I don't do any gaming, just streaming of Netflix, Disney+, etc. I do have a lot of Wi'Fi devices in the home though (thermostat, Alexa, appliances, etc.) but if they're all set up to work on the Eero network then even if the Rogers modem is broadcasting a separate network it shouldn't matter, should it?

At the end of the day I want to do whatever is right, but if simply taking the Rogers modem out of bridge mode can work without any negative effect elsewhere then that'd be my preference simply because it's so easy to do.

If you know how to get it into/out of bridge mode yourself then just test it and see what happens. Broadcasting a different wifi network doesn't really matter as long as you don't expect devices on different network to be able to see each other. I have the the same setup, non bridge ISP modem with google wifi attached as my main router. If i wanted to use more hardwired devices I hook up a switch to the google wifi's LAN port , everything will then be under the google wifi router's network.

I'm going to say it right now the 4852U is a bad router. I have one.
It's set to bridge mode and I'm all Unifi.

coilz wrote: ↑ If you know how to get it into/out of bridge mode yourself then just test it and see what happens. Broadcasting a different wifi network doesn't really matter as long as you don't expect devices on different network to be able to see each other. I have the the same setup, non bridge ISP modem with google wifi attached as my main router. If i wanted to use more hardwired devices I hook up a switch to the google wifi's LAN port , everything will then be under the google wifi router's network.

I think I'll give it a shot tonight and will report back once done. It seems that installing the switch is the right thing long term though so I'll pick one up and install it on the week-end.

Edit: Would this switch be okay?
https://www.amazon.ca/TP-Link-TL-SG108- ... 169&sr=8-6

The_Professor wrote: ↑ I think I'll give it a shot tonight and will report back once done. It seems that installing the switch is the right thing long term though so I'll pick one up and install it on the week-end.

Edit: Would this switch be okay?
https://www.amazon.ca/TP-Link-TL-SG108- ... 169&sr=8-6

Yes that switch should work for any regular network devices.

tebore wrote: ↑I'm going to say it right now the 4852U is a bad router. I have one.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ At the end of the day I want to do whatever is right, but if simply taking the Rogers modem out of bridge mode can work without any negative effect elsewhere then that'd be my preference simply because it's so easy to do.

See what @tebore said. And it's better to have only one router on the network. I am not familiar with Eero but if you can, keep it as the only router, plug everything into it including your EyezOn module and leave your CODA in bridge mode.

The_Professor wrote: ↑ Long story short I've been made to believe that the Rogers modem while in bridge mode will only give out one IP address and the Eero and NVR are now both requiring one.

That is incorrect. Rogers gives two IP addresses and your EyezOn module was getting one. Rogers may decide to give out only one IP per customer, that's another reason to have only one router with one external IP.

Yup, agreed. I just ordered the switch and will just hook that up instead of trying anything else that at best was a bandaid solution.

I'll confirm once done in a day or two. Thanks everyone for your input!

You can take your Rogers modem+router out of bridge mode, and plug your main Eero router into a LAN port on the Rogers router. This will give you two LANS, one cascaded from the other. This works perfectly for most purposes, and the extra overhead is too trivial to be a concern. Your will get people warning you about the potential pitfalls of double NAT, but it's not a real concern. What you must be careful to do is assign a different LAN IP range to the Rogers router and the Eero router. So for example if the LAN IP range of one is 192.168.1.xxx, the other should be set to 192.168.2.xxx or something like that. You can turn off WiFI on the Rogers router since you will use the Eero system for WiFi.

You can then hook up as many devices as you like to both the Rogers router LAN ports and the Eero LAN ports or WiFi. All share the single WAN IP address issued by Rogers to their router. Devices on the Eero LAN can see and talk to devices on the Rogers LAN since it is "upstream", but not vice-versa. So if you had a file server on the Eero LAN, other devices on the Eero LAN can use it, but not devices on the Rogers LAN.

If you have a device that needs ethernet and doesn't support WiFi connection, and it's not near any available LAN port, it won't solve that problem.

Scote64 wrote: ↑ Your will get people warning you about the potential pitfalls of double NAT, but it's not a real concern.

Double-NAT is never good. It's a bandaid solution. If it can be avoided it should be avoided. VOIP is one example that will have problems with double-NAT.

alpovs wrote: ↑ Double-NAT is never good. It's a bandaid solution. If it can be avoided it should be avoided. VOIP is one example that will have problems with double-NAT.

I've used VoIP with double-NAT in several different installations. Using it right now. No problems whatsoever. I'm not saying double-NAT can't cause issues in some rare cases, but it's a potential problem blown way out of proportion by people who've only heard that it's a potential problem.