Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/14/2006 11:57:13 AM EDT
Howdy,

I've been beating my head against this for days and haven't found a suitable solution:

I have:

Actiontec GT701-wg DSL modem from Qwest. It has 1 enet port, 1 usb port, and is a 802.11g gateway.

D-Link DI-604 4-port router

Linksys MR-814 4-port router with 802.11b

SMC WEBT-G 802.11g Wireless AP/bridge/repeater

My goal was to stick one of the routers and the WEBT-G in the family room so the Xbox and ReplayTV would have a network connection. I would put the dsl modem and the other router in the office for the 2-3 computers there. Eventually, I want to wire the house with Cat 5E/6 and coax, but the family room is a pain because it has no attic or basement access. The WEBT-G was necessary because the MR-814 doesn't support 802.11 on the WAN side (and I wanted the faster speed) .

Here was my original configuration, which worked ok:

GT701-wg connected to the DI-604 WAN port with enet (office) and to the WEBT-G with 802.11g (family room). MR-814 WAN port connected to WEBT-G via enet. The WAN interfaces on both routers, the WEBT-G, and the GT701 were all in 192.168.0.0/24 with manual addresses. The DI-604 LAN side was 192.168.1.0/24 with DHCP on. The MR-814 LAN side was 192.168.3.0/24 with DHCP on.

This worked fine for letting all computers access the internet, but it did not work well for talking between subnets. The GT701-wg allowed static routes, so I routed 192.168.1.0/24 through the DI-604 WAN addy and 192.168.3.0/24 through the MR-814 WAN addy. This still didn't allow a computer in 3.0 to talk to 1.0 or vice versa.

I then tried to take the 2nd layer of NAT out of the equation. I left the DI-604 WAN port open, turned off its DHCP, set its LAN addy to lie in 0.0/24, and hooked the GT701-wg to the LAN side via enet. Each office computer had a static IP in 0.0/24 with the GT701-wg (192.168.0.1) configured as the gateway. The DI-604 happily acted as a switch, and all was well in the office.

Now for the family room; I repeated the same procedure. I hooked the WEBT-G up to the LAN side of the MR-814 instead of the WAN. I disabled DHCP on the MR-814 and set it to be in the 0.0/24 subnet. I gave the family room machines (xbox & replaytv) static IPs in 0.0/24. The setup was identical to the office except that the WEBT-G was acting as a bridge between the MR-814 and the GT701-wg instead of a simple cable between the DI-604 and the GT701-wg.

It didn't work the same, however. No machine on in the family room (old 3.0/24 subnet) could ping the GT701-wg (192.168.0.1). The WEBT-G showed that it was indeed connected to the GT701-wg via 802.11g, but nothing attached to the WEBT-G could ping the GT701-wg. (I don't know if the WEBT-G could ping it because it doesn't have that capability in its web interface.)

Does anybody have any suggestions for how to make this setup work?

By "work", I mean:
Any computer can access any other computer
Any computer can access the internet.

Thanks for reading!
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 1:31:07 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/14/2006 2:20:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By brassburn:
It's late in the day and I am fried so maybe it's in your post somewhere but, why do you need two unique networks within your small environment? In other words, what is the problem that you are trying to address by routing between two networks in such a small environment?



I don't want multiple subnets (although using the routers in NAT mode does allow all the computers to access the internet, just not each other). I'd rather just use my routers as switches (WAN port disconnected, no DHCP). The problem is that when I do that, I can't get across the wireless bridge (GT701-wg <--> WEBT-G) to my family room router. The same setup without the wireless bridge works fine. Somebody is routing things to the wrong place, and I can't figure out where or why.

Can anybody suggest a good free LAN analysis tool (other than ping, nmap, and tracert)?
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 7:23:19 AM EDT
Any other ideas? he
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 7:56:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 8:00:39 AM EDT by ARDunstan]
You are making your network way too complex for what you want to do.
THREE different subnets for a handful of computers???
There is no freaking need to do all that crap.
Set everything in the same subnet, and it will all work fine.
You need to buy a Switch. You have 2 Routers in the mix.
There should be only ONE router routing packets; your DSL router.
Double NATting is bad.

The topology should be simple.

DSL-->Switch--WAP-->Wireles PCs.

Connect your hardwired PCs to your Switch.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 9:20:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 9:23:03 AM EDT by bnorman]

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
You are making your network way too complex for what you want to do.
THREE different subnets for a handful of computers???
There is no freaking need to do all that crap.
Set everything in the same subnet, and it will all work fine.
You need to buy a Switch. You have 2 Routers in the mix.
There should be only ONE router routing packets; your DSL router.
Double NATting is bad.

The topology should be simple.

DSL-->Switch--WAP-->Wireles PCs.

Connect your hardwired PCs to your Switch.



See, this is why I made the inital post so long. hing
(2) As I stated, I'm trying to avoid double NAT.

(3) As I stated, I'm already using one of the routers as a switch (no NAT, no DHCP).

(4) As I stated, I don't have any wireless PCs. The DSL modem has wireless, and I use it to bridge to the SMC gateway in the family room.

I realize I can go out and buy a bunch of crap (another wireless AP, two switches), but that's not the point.
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 11:58:47 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/16/2006 11:59:40 AM EDT by ARDunstan]
When you try to set each device to the same subnet, the wireless bridge does not
work, correct?
And you are trying to find out where the problem is, right?

<It didn't work the same, however. No machine on in the family room (old 3.0/24 subnet) could ping the GT701-wg (192.168.0.1). The WEBT-G showed that it was indeed connected to the GT701-wg via 802.11g, but nothing attached to the WEBT-G could ping the GT701-wg. (I don't know if the WEBT-G could ping it because it doesn't have that capability in its web interface.)>

Is it still at 192.168.3.X?
Link Posted: 3/16/2006 12:49:42 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ARDunstan:
When you try to set each device to the same subnet, the wireless bridge does not
work, correct?
And you are trying to find out where the problem is, right?

<It didn't work the same, however. No machine on in the family room (old 3.0/24 subnet) could ping the GT701-wg (192.168.0.1). The WEBT-G showed that it was indeed connected to the GT701-wg via 802.11g, but nothing attached to the WEBT-G could ping the GT701-wg. (I don't know if the WEBT-G could ping it because it doesn't have that capability in its web interface.)>

Is it still at 192.168.3.X?



Nope, everything (including the WEBT-G and the attached router) has a unique static address in 0.0/24 now. The setups in the office and family room are identical (router has DHCP off, WAN port open), except the office router is attached to the dsl modem directly with a patch cable and the family room router is attached through the WEBT-G wireless bridge. The WEBT-G bridging works fine when it's plugged into the router WAN port, but things go south when I try to just use the router as a switch and plug the WEBT-G into a LAN port. I'm guessing that the routing is screwed up in the family room because (despite the static route I put in the router), packets aren't getting back to the DSL modem.

Is there a good diagnostic tool for figuring out exactly who can see who?

Thanks,
Ben
Top Top