• January 24, 2022, 12:00:10 AM
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


This Forum Beta is ONLY for registered owners of D-Link products in the USA for which we have created boards at this time.

Author Topic: DES 1005P switch to a G624T modem/router?  (Read 3592 times)


  • Level 1 Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2
DES 1005P switch to a G624T modem/router?
« on: May 10, 2010, 03:30:28 AM »

[I can't find the appropriate child forum for this question so please let me know if it needs to be elsewhere (or move it if you have the power :) ) ]

I have a DES-1005P switch connected to a cable modem which is working fine. I have no spare ports left on it though and I want to add some more clients to the network (specifically a HP printer) and I have to hand a DSL-G624T ADSL Modem/Router.

So my questions are...
(a) is there some way of connecting the G624T as a simple router downstream of the switch (i.e. disable the modem function and connect a cable from the switch to it)?
(b) does it even make any sense at all to attempt to connect a router downstream of a switch?
(c) if this won't work what's my best (and cheapest) alternative for getting new clients on the network?

(Note I'm stuck with the switch connected to the cable modem and there's no way that element can be altered).

Thanks in advance.


  • Poweruser
  • Level 9 Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1675
Re: DES 1005P switch to a G624T modem/router?
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2010, 08:18:34 AM »

If you change the LAN IP of the DSL modem to coincide with your LAN network while not interfering  with any existing hosts.  And turn off DHCP on the DSL modem you should be able to use its LAN ports as an unmanaged switch.

But a regular unmanaged switch really would work better.
non progredi est regredi


  • Level 1 Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: DES 1005P switch to a G624T modem/router?
« Reply #2 on: May 14, 2010, 04:37:26 AM »

Thanks very much for that information.

I made an attempt to get the router working as you suggested but it didn't go well (probably down to a failure of configuration on my part). I didn't put too much effort into it though as it seems I'll need more network points than it could provide anyway. So a second switch seems like the way to go, as you said.

Thanks again.