• Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 630
  • Last Modified:

CONNECTING A LINKSYS WAP54G AND WRT54GS TOGETHER VIA WAN PORTS

MY SETUP -  Consists of a LAN made up of hard wire networked PC's plus wireless AP's, Routers and Repeaters using Linksys WAP54G's and a couple of WRT54G's.  At a 3 mile distant location is a DSL modem plus a Linksys WRT54GS running as a Gateway, which uses a high gain antenna to link with a WAP54G  at the first location running as an AP Client of the WRT54GS.
MY QUESTION - I want to use one of my WRT54G's on my LAN for DHCP and as a Gateway to the DSL modem.  My tests consist of networking the WAN port of the WRT and WAP so as to maintain exclusivity of my LAN, with control of clients' accessing the DSL and non-interfering DHCP service.  Logically speaking, my WRT54G's LAN IP would be the Default Gateway for my LAN based PC's, while the Default Gateway IP address of my WAP54G linking to the distant WRT54GS would be the IP address of the distant WRT54GS.  I have been trying all sorts of WRT54G configurations, to no avail.  I would be interested to hear comments/suggestions/whatever from anyone out there who has tried such an arrangement.  If I plug the WAP directly into a networked HUB or one of the WRT's LAN ports, everything works fine - EXCEPT that I now have frequent IP conflicts with workstations outside my LAN, and I cannot use DHCP because it also exists somewhere along the distant link.
Thanks in advance to anyone responding.
Alex King
0
REOAlexKing
Asked:
REOAlexKing
  • 10
  • 8
1 Solution
 
benhansonCommented:
You are basically saying you want to create another subnet, using the WRT as a router that has a default gateway of the DSL WRT54GS?

As it sounds like you are a bit of a hacker, and would like to get the most out of your WRT, I would install DDR-WRT(http://www.dd-wrt.com/).  It will allow you to assign a static IP to the WAN port which is what you need.  I thought the regular WRT had a static IP setting as well.

If it does, you need to statically assign it to an IP address on the subnet of the DSL WRT, then configure the DHCP server on the distant WRT to use a different subnet(192.168.1.x on DSL WRT, 192.168.2.x on Distant WRT)
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
Thanks benhanson for your input.  I'm really not hacking, but I am, however, constrained by certain limitations beyond my control.  It's complicated sounding, and I have control over only the local LAN portion - distant access parameters are chisled in stone.  I have to use a WAP54G at this end to link with the distant WRT54GS Gateway as an AP Client - which is also chisled in stone. That's a no-brainer, and works just dandy.   I cannot use the distant DHCP to serve my local LAN, therefore I have to seperate the two in this regard.  Maintaining the local IP configuration is another issue.  Thus, I elected to go with an available WRT54G placed between the LAN and the WAP that links with the distant WRT.  If this were pictures, it would make a whole lot more sense at a glance, than this wordy approach.  The prime problem in getting this to work has been linking the local WRT via it's WAN port to the single LAN port of the WAP.  I cannot use any of the LAN ports of the WRT, as such would defeat the purpose of maintaining my LAN oblivious to the distant DHCP, etc.  Linksys says, 'Oh yeah, that will work fine' - but it doesn't.  Or, at least, I am overlooking something Linksys has taken for granted.  And yes, the WAN port of the WRT can be configured with a STATIC (or DHCP) IP address of my choice.  Interestingly, Linksys doesn't permit just any old IP address to be used - it must fit within prescribed DSL parameters.  I have made this work on the bench, with the WRT's WAN port STATIC IP address matching up with that of the WAP, but when I stick it on my LAN it becomes quite a different matter.  I have looked at the DDR-WRT Web site, they posted only for a v1 WRT, whereas I am using v3 devices.  This is a case of I must make do with what I have at hand, for reasons I am not at liberty to discuss. So, after discovering this Web site while on an unrelated quest, I thought I would run this up the flag pole to see if anyone salutes - someone else who has encountered issues connecting a WRT54G via it's WAN port to the single LAN port of a WAP54G.  Again, thank you for your time and trouble. Alex
0
 
jekl2000Commented:
Because I have not attempted this, this is an uneducated guess, but because the wap54g has no WAN port, you may need to use a crossover cable.
0
NEW Veeam Agent for Microsoft Windows

Backup and recover physical and cloud-based servers and workstations, as well as endpoint devices that belong to remote users. Avoid downtime and data loss quickly and easily for Windows-based physical or public cloud-based workloads!

 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
Hello jek12000 - That is something I double-checked with Linksys, they said no crossover required.  Actually, it worked just fine - on the bench.  I tried WAN port IP variants ranging from the same IP family as the WAP to even that of the distant WRT and even further.  I mixed and matched LAN & Wireless vs. WAN IP settings, and a little bit of Port Forwarding.  Basically, I used procedures that are common to other devices, but for some reason these two Linksys devices work together fine on the bench but not when connected to the LAN and distant WRT.  Perhaps my 70 year old mind is getting gummed up after 30 years professional computing and I should go greet people at Wall Mart, or some such...  Hi!  ("Hi" is communications shorthand for laughter.)  Thank you for your input.  Alex
0
 
benhansonCommented:
By hacker, I meant tinkerer, but no matter.  So the WAP should be plugged into the the WAN port of the Distant WRT.  The WAP is basically a switch with a wireless bridge.  Do you get a link light on the connection?  Did you find the option for Static IP on the WAN port?  As far as how it should work, both WAP's should be in the same subnet, and also in the same subnet as the DSL WRT, though they should probably be statically addressed and thus outside of the DHCP range.  The WAN port of the distant WRT should also be in this same subnet.

Could you post a crude diagram with addresses?

DSL WRT - ???.???.???.???
     |
     |(ethernet, WAP in Port X of WRT)
     |
DSL WAP - ???.???.???.???
     .
     |(802.11b/g wireless)
     .
Distant WAP -  ???.???.???.???
     |
     |(ethernet, WAP in WAN port of WRT)
     |
Distant WRT
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
Hello behhanson - The WAP doesn't connect to the distant WRT's LAN port - it connects wirelessly over about 3.4 miles as an "AP Client".  The WAN port of the distant WRT connects to the DSL modem.  The distant WRT is configured as a Gateway.  These two devices are not at issue - they link without a problem.  I just need to figure how the LOCAL WRT talks to the LOCAL WAP via respective WAN/LAN ports without a problem on the bench, but not when I stick them on the local LAN.  I will rig up a diagram and post (I was unaware graphics were accepted here). First, thought, I must get to work.  I am 8K miles from you...
0
 
benhansonCommented:
You can't post graphics, unfortunately.  You could just fill in the blanks on this diagram, I've corrected my mistaken assumption.  I initially thought you had 2 WAP.
To be clear, DSL WRT is the WRT that has DSL, LOCAL WAP is the 3.4 mile distant AP, LOCAL WRT is the WRT with wired ethernet connectivity to the WAP.

DSL WRT - 192.168.???.???
     .
     |(802.11b/g wireless)
     .
LOCAL WAP -  192.168.???.???
     |
     |(ethernet, WAP in WAN port of WRT)
     |
LOCAL WRT - 192.168.???.???

3.4 miles is a long wireless shot by any means.  Have you gotten any data across this link?
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
Yup!  You got it.  The local WRT supports a combined wired/wireless LAN.  I must maintain the existing IP structure, while the distant ashore WRT, configured as a Gateway and connected via WAN port to the DSL modem, and all thereafter, might as well be on another IP planet.  So I figure that by using my local WRT, also configured as a Gateway, I can maintain ashore and afloat in seperate IP worlds.  Acting as an AP Client for the distant WRT, the local WAP is more or less a transparent device.  With the WAP in the same IP family as the distant WRT, I tried matching the local WRT's WAN port IP address.  Worked perfect on the bench - not when installed.  Distant WRT = 192.168.1.1, WAP = 192.168.1.239, and the local WRT's WAN port = 192.168.1.238  Local LAN IP family is 192.168.1.xxx while the local WRT serves as a Default Gateway 192.168.1.2 - in order to avoid conflict with the distant WRT.  The Default Gateway of the WAP is 192.168.1.1 - to match the distant WRT Gateway.  I know that I cannot 'see' the WAP through the WRT when it is connected to the WRT's WAN port, but the WAN port should basically 'see' the distant WRT's LAN ports via the 'transparent' WAP.  A workstation connected to the distant WRT's LAN port does not 'see' the local WRT.  If I disregard the local WRT and connect my WAP direct to one of my local LAN's HUB's, I have a pipeline all the way to the Internet.  But no local LAN protection.  Since it works on the bench, I have been thinking that Port Forwarding or some such needs to be active.  Just haven't come up with the right combo yet.  Stuck with these Linksys devices, I would think that Linksys or some third party would have by now published something related.  Linksys says they know of none such, and that I am the only one they have encountered using a shipboard unstable platform for such a link.  In fact, one of the friendly folks at Linksys asked me to let them know how it all shakes out.  Hi!  BTW - the DSL, as usual, has it's own set of IP, Gateway and DNS addresses which are programmed into the WAN port of the distant WRT.  I even tried using them at this end of the string...  Your input is appreciated.  Always ready to listen to someone else in the same game.  When you get this old, you sometimes tend to consider that, having 'been there, done that', you 'know it all'.  Then someone comes along and points out the egg on your face.  Too bad some sort of graphics attachments or detail  is not allowed here.  When I get into it with Microsoft's Technet, a picture is usually worth a whole bunch of words.  I have a couple of neet PDC files...  Alex
 
0
 
benhansonCommented:
You can't have both subnets the same.  Change the LOCAL WRT subnet to 192.168.2.x.  The WAN static IP will still be 192.168.1.238, but the subnet defined by the LOCAL WRT can't be the same as the DSL WRT.  The reason it works on the bench, is on the bench you aren't having an addressing conflict.  Once you hook up to the remote subnet, the routers don't know where to route anything because both subnets are the same.
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
I agree.  Perhaps my logic is flawed in that I am expecting that the local WRT, configured as a GATEWAY, serves to separate the local LAN subnetting manipulations from that of the distant networked devices.  I will try to get the distant WRT at least temporarily changed, see what comes of it and then get back to you.   Without the local WRT in the mix - connecting my local WAN directly to my local LAN - it works.  Without changing the subnets either end.  Now, where did I put that application to the Funny Farm...  Alex  
0
 
benhansonCommented:
If you just used the Local WRT as a switch, disabling the DHCP server on it, everything would work and you would have one big subnet.  DHCP is a first come first serve service, so you don't want conflicting servers on the same subnet.

Basically, each WRT has 2 addressable interfaces:  WAN Interface, LAN Interface.

If the DSL WRT LAN Interface=192.168.1.1, and the LOCAL WRT LAN Interface is also 192.168.1.1, neither will never try to send traffic to the other.  As far as they are concerned 192.168.1.x should be directly connected and doesn't need to be routed.  Since you want an independent subnet, you have to give LOCAL WRT a different LAN IP address(and subsequent DHCP Scope) and configure a static route on the DSL WRT.

LOCAL WRT with LAN=192.168.2.1 and WAN=192.168.1.238 will have two known subnets:  192.168.1.x on WAN Interface and 192.168.2.x on LAN Interface.  Since 192.168.2.1 will be the default gateway assigned to WAN Interface, any traffic that LOCAL WRT doesn't know what to do with will go to 192.168.1.1(DSL WRT).

DSL WRT with LAN=192.168.1.1 and WAN=(your public IP address from DSL connection), will only know about 192.168.1.1 so you will have to add a static route pointing 192.168.2.1 to 192.168.1.238.  Otherwise traffic from LOCAL WRT will make it to DSL WRT but will never make it back.
0
 
benhansonCommented:
I meant to say(regarding LOCAL WRT)

Since 192.168.1.1 will be the default gateway assigned to WAN Interface, any traffic that LOCAL WRT doesn't know what to do with will go to 192.168.1.1(DSL WRT).
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
A few pages ago I  mentioned that my local WRT, configured as a Gateway, was set to 192.168.1.2, while the distant WRT - also configured as a Gateway, but for the DSL modem - was set to 192.168.1.1  I haven't culled through everything, perhaps I mis-typed in a different comment that they were both 192.168.1.1 - which is incorrect.  Well, anyhow, in my  neck of the woods it is Friday evening and I am going to hit the sack (sailor speak).  Darn, I hate to have to change fifty-odd workstation subnets just to make this work... Back to you tomorrow.  Alex  
0
 
benhansonCommented:
Are you not using DHCP?

It's not the 4th octet that is the problem, it's the 3rd octet.

192.168.1.0/24 is the network ID.  Whether it's 192.168.1.1 or 192.168.1.2 doesn't matter.  You need the LOCAL WRT to be on a different network, which is why I suggested changing it to 192.168.2.1 which has a network ID of 192.168.2.0/24.

You are focusing on the x.x.x.1 x.x.x.2 portion of the address.  You need to focus on the x.x.1.x x.x.2.x portion of the address.  Third octet, not fourth.
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
Just got up - it's 0700 Saturday morning in this neck of the woods.  It is my INTENT to use DHCP.  For now, everything is STATIC, no IP conflicts encountered.  Since changing the third Octet on my local LAN is out of the question, I am going to have to work with the distant location to see if change there is possible.  I have previously been advised 'no'.  As I have mentioned, if I bypass the local WRT by lifting the local WAP from the WAN port and using either one of the LAN ports of the WRT or one of my HUB's, no conflicts exist and everything performs normal.  Except that I am then open to the distant DHCP and my local LAN becomes visible to all rubberneckers.  Thus, the attempt to establish a local Gateway using the WRT.  Will revert after Monday (Sunday, your time).  Thanks again. Alex
0
 
benhansonCommented:
I'm just curious why you can't change your own subnet?
0
 
REOAlexKingAuthor Commented:
This is a subject I am not at liberty to discuss.  Consider where I work...
0
 
benhansonCommented:
OK, now I'm reading your posts like and P.I. trying to decipher who, where and what you are.

What has me confused is your statement:

It's complicated sounding, and I have control over only the local LAN portion - distant access parameters are chisled in stone.

So I don't know why you can't change the local subnet.

Anyway, at this point I'm just being argumentative :)
0
 
benhansonCommented:
I think my answer was correct, just not what he wanted to hear.
0

Featured Post

Microsoft Certification Exam 74-409

VeeamĀ® is happy to provide the Microsoft community with a study guide prepared by MVP and MCT, Orin Thomas. This guide will take you through each of the exam objectives, helping you to prepare for and pass the examination.

  • 10
  • 8
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now