Why do manufacturers persist in making it hard to secure wireless lans? Case in point - I have a desktop (wired) and two laptops. Currently I have WPA2/AES but I am working on getting RADIUS up. Additionally, my family has:
(a) Wii - will not connect to g-only router and no RADIUS
(b) several nintendo DS - will only connect to WEP or nothing
(c) linksys wireless camera - Will connect to WPA2 but not a RADIUS authenticated network.
I am considering buying another wireless router to use for the devices listed above and unfortunately use WEP. I would prefer everything to be in same subnet and from what I understand, a bridge would be order. So, my questions are:
(1) Is it possible to do this, have one router with at least a WPA2 with a internet connection, the second router would be for less secure clients however use the stronger security to communicate with the first router?
and if so
(2) if the second router was b/g for the clients would that force the whole network to be b/g even if g was used for the bridge
(3) how could I minimize the security risk caused by the second router - if WEP is too big of a risk I could just ignore the DSes and run WPA2 but it would still have to be a b/g network
I'm sure I have more questions but cannot recall them - they will probably arise later from responses.