Discussing daisy-chaining and CPU load distribution.
Discussing daisy-chaining and CPU load distribution.
Hello everyone! I'm a self taught amateur network enthusiast, and this is my first multiple-router-network on the making here. So thanks anyone for the help! Also, I made some diagrams so I hope it helps! I have two questions, first one I feel to be more basic: Is there any problems or disadvantages to daisy-chaining routers as in option B? I don't think there is, because I've seen many do it, but would like a confirmation. My routers will all be in access point mode, with the exception of router #1 and the ISP modem (bridge). Also, there is around 20 meters of Cat6 cable in between each router (except the ISP modem; it's right beside Router #1 ), unless I don't daisy-chain, then I would have to spend more in cables, having a 60m, 40m, and 2x 20m cables. LINK LINK My router #1 on a busy day will be under a heavy load, with up to 20 people on it's hotspot and their smartphones and laptops. #1 's Slave r outers #2 , #3 , #4 and #5 will only have 2-4 people on them. So, my second question is: - Is there anyway to relief the Computing load from my Router #1 ? Maybe substituting my Router #2 for a better and more powerful router and somehow having it processing data coming from #3 and #4 ? Maybe if I don't set Router #2 up as an access point, and just deactivate it's DHCP? Will router #3 and #4 work as its slave routers? Or maybe having router #2 receive it's ethernet from Router#1 in its Wan port, creating another net. Although this could create double Nat issues, no? Which option should I take? LINK LINK -Or nah, maybe I have no way of relieving the master router( #1 ) and I should just set it up as option A or option B. Or maybe even I'm fine with this amount of people and routers with these routers. Thanks you so much! any help is appreciated!
Let’s clarify the terms first. The Archer C6 units shouldn’t be called “routers” anymore because their role has changed—once in AP mode, they function as wireless access points. The Archer AX74 acts as the main router managing NAT and DHCP for clients connecting via its AP or through one of the C6 units.
For options A or B, you should be fine. Options C and D seem more complex than needed for your goal. You likely won’t face double-NAT if each router is limited to a specific DHCP range. When dealing with heavy load, consider whether it’s affecting client transfers or causing delays. You might need to switch to a different wireless router, disable bridge mode, or use another wired device, turning the AX74 into an AP. Running a network device with fewer tasks frees up CPU resources, allowing the AX74 to operate more efficiently.
The issue with chaining switches is that traffic from many clients builds up as you approach the core router. One gigabit link must handle increasing amounts of data from more devices. When you stream videos or use bandwidth-heavy services, this can slow down. Using a different setup would be a better choice.
It's great to hear your feedback! I hadn't realized you could configure a DHCP range. I'll explore that further, thanks for the tip! Your AX74 CPU choice sounds solid for the network setup. Running as a central AP might simplify routing tasks compared to managing them yourself. I'm considering placing a router between the ISP and the main router #1 for this purpose.
I apologize if my explanation was unclear; it seems I was trying to describe a theoretical setup. Next week, I'll be building the network, so I want to make sure everything is well thought out. When I mentioned being stressed, I meant imagining how many users would connect—around 20 Wi-Fi devices plus about three access points per AP. Honestly, I'm not sure it would overload it. It's mostly guest connections at a country house we occasionally rent. Usage per device isn't heavy, but many devices link to the main router via Wi-Fi. Occasional heavy use could happen if I work from a MacBook there, but mostly it's casual browsing and streaming.
A friend recommended option B with daisy-chaining so the main router wouldn't handle multiple incoming connections through its switch. That would help since the router #1 is already busy with many devices. Also, the daisy-chained access points would likely have just a few connected devices—maybe one or two streaming sessions at a time. With only 1Gigabit from the ISP, the clients shouldn't strain that single connection. That sounds like a solid plan!
Router 1 remains responsible for all your WAN traffic as the default gateway. You'll encounter bottlenecks on that single backbone connection before router 1 runs out of switching capacity. Either scenario can work, though you might not notice a problem; A is the recommended approach. Edited February 7, 2022 by Needfuldoer A (hub-and-spoke) is the superior choice, not B (daisy chain)
Routing Gigabit demands significant CPU resources, you're looking for the most efficient router. Your friend misunderstood how this operates. The main goal of a router with a switch is that the router doesn't have to manage that traffic unless it's passing through its WiFi AP or the internet. From the router's perspective, whether you use all ports or just one doesn't change the overall load—it will still distribute the same amount of traffic as the switch would if connected to a single port. In practice, the router and the switch function as separate hardware units, each handling their tasks independently, even though they're physically in the same enclosure.
Unless QoS, DPI or VPN features are needed on the router, the setup direction likely won't affect the outcome. Performance will rely on how well Wi-Fi is implemented in access points and devices. Today's embedded routers avoid using the CPU for every packet processing; they handle NAT directly on hardware. Most MIPS- and ARM CPUs can only achieve around 500 Mbps in software, which is significantly less than the 2,000 Mbps needed for symmetric gigabit fiber. If router #1 begins to lag while clients maintain a strong signal, you can add another AP on the opposite side of the room to distribute the load. In dense environments, it's typical to deploy several APs within a compact area serving over 30 devices.