Many thanks both. I don't have any problems at the moment thanks to the excellent advice here so hopefully I'll be able to add another spare router/AP without any problems, fingers crossed.
Thanks Tom. We have an old house with thick solid walls and the current router is not in the best location. However, all the structural cabling is such that moving the main router is not really an option. Now the youngsters in the house often stream music from YT via their mobiles when they move about their chores in the house. And we have a few spots at the back of the house, where the wifi coverage is patchy. The best option would be a mesh system, the cost of the kit and work required to hide the hardware and extra power points is not worth it for the little gain it would offer. So having been given a spare router, I thought I would give it a go. As I already written the results are not exactly what I expected.I don’t know if seamless roaming is achievable. For that reason I give each access point a different SSID and select the one that should work when my phone holds onto a useless one which it does do regularly.
Thanks Mick. I have tried 3 mobiles (iphone, an older Samsung and new Redmi) and all suffer the same symptoms. Going from secondary to primary is seamless, no intervention required and it would seem that connection doesn't actually drop. I suppose I could test this further, but it is purely academic now, as the in the opoosite direction, from primary to secondary, it simply doesn't work."Seamless roaming" is something of an oxymoron - generally it just means it requires no user interaction.
Much of the process is vested in the client devices - it is they that decide if/when to roam and control the interactions with the AP's (routers) to effect the swap. Some are simply just better at than others and there's nothing much we an do about.
For example, a lot of clients (needlessly) request a new IP address when the roam and that's a process that isn't instant. If the IP address changes as a result, it can upset a lot of applications.
Sometimes things get a bit more "interesting" if the roam requires a change of protocols or security paradigms, so you can help it by getting everything except the radio channels as similar as possible. For example, if all your client devices are N and/or AC capable, you could try disabling support for the older A/B/G protocols, but it's a bit of a forlorn hope.
Of course, a heterogeneous equipment mix can also cause issues - on big sites we'd use a manage fleet of AP's that are all more or less the same and managed from a single platform.
Channel 100 is one of the "DFS" channels (which have some special handling in the presence of RADAR) you could maybe try experimenting with one of the other non-DFS channels (48 or lower.)
It may be that you are suffering interference from a neighbour. Again, not much you can do about that, but you could take a survey and see if you can devise a channel plan that either avoids them completely or avails the best "signal margin" (difference between you and them if on the same channel.) Trouble is, a lot of people leave their kit set up for auto-everything out of the box, so you might find a carefully designed neighbour avoiding channel plan falls to pieces weeks/months later if the neighbours' kit re-tunes for some reason.
@redmike5 - your settings look fine, I doubt there's anything you could change on your routers to make it work better. It is what it is.
Thank Mick. I spend another night or two trying various combinations of settings, but nothing helps. Both routers run on the latest firmware, so updating was not an option. All in all, I decided that running the VR600 as AP was not an option.That would suggest to me that one of your routers is not handling the re-association process very well, but we'd have to get into some packet traces and detailed analysis to know for sure.
Unfortunately, even if we can find culpability in a particular router, there's nothing we can do about as it's highly unlikely to offer us any control over the process - it's essentially baked into their OS. We could try moaning at the vendor and ask them to investigate and fix any problem, but there's not much chance of them doing that unless it's affecting lots of customers.
We could have a look and see if there's a newer firmware that addresses the issue, but I wouldn't just slap on the latest and hope for the best - so doing is little better than guessing and could even make things worse. It's perhaps worth a go when all else has failed and it's the "last thing to try" before chucking the device and trying a different one.
The only practical unilateral option would be to try something else and see if it works better.
Did you do the other basics as set out in post 1 and did the settings stick? Bottom line does Sitecom allow access to network and internet?I hope someone can help. My primary/internet router is a BT HH6, and I'm trying to add an old Sitecom WLR-2100 to extend the wifi upstairs. I've gone into the HH6 and made a note of the LAN addresses used, and the address range set by the dhcp server. Having done that, I've logged into the Sitecom (sitecom + configuration pc via ethernet), changed the LAN ip address, but after doing this the pc no longer sees the sitecom, even after a reboot of both. Any ideas?
Did you do the other basics as set out in post 1 and did the settings stick? Bottom line does Sitecom allow access to network and internet?