[Webinar] Streamline your web hosting managementRegister Today

  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 1687
  • Last Modified:

Getting routers to accept another router's private subnet

I am using Verizon FIOS router for my FIOS internet connection.  I have another router, Belkin WNDR3700, connected to the FIOS router, so that I can extend the range.  My connection between the two routers is FIOS router LAN port to Belkin WAN port.  The subnet associated with the FIOS router is 192.168.1.x and the subnet associated with the Belkin router is 192.168.2.x.  I have set the Belkin router to static IP for convenience.  It is set to  Both routers are DHCP.  I have created two network objects in the FIOS router:  Subnet 1 and Subnet 2 to represent each subnet.  I setup a static route in the FIOS modem:,,  I have setup two firewall filters in the FIOS modem: -> for both in and out.  I have made no additional changes to the Belkin router.

I can access all of my 192.168.1.x subnet devices when connected to either subnet.  I can access internet from any device.  However, I cannot access 192.168.1.x subnet devices when connected to the 192.168.2.x subnet.  I have attempted to create a static route on the Belkin like I did for the Verizon modem without luck.  When setting up the Belkin static route, i get an error that the address conflicts with the WAN address.  My Belkin static route settings are:,,

I am unable to ping the 192.168.2.x devices from 192.168.1.x devices.

What can I do????
  • 5
  • 3
1 Solution
Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
Just don't use the WAN side of the added router and turn off its DHCP service.
Assign it a static IP address in the subnet you're going to use so you can access it later.
See the attached diagram.
fmarshall, your drawing contains an error: The routers need to have an address in the same subnet as the LAN, while your example tells to use 192.168.0.x for routers in a LAN ... The annotations are correct, though.
DCCoolBreezeAuthor Commented:
Thanks for the information; however, i prefer to use the WAN port of the additional router.  It provides a number of administration options when engaged that are not available using LAN to LAN connection.  I have done the LAN to LAN in the past, but am trying to get the LAN to WAN configuration working this time.

What about a static route??
Will You Be GDPR Compliant by 5/28/2018?

GDPR? That's a regulation for the European Union. But, if you collect data from customers or employees within the EU, then you need to know about GDPR and make sure your organization is compliant by May 2018. Check out our preparation checklist to make sure you're on track today!

Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
You can do that as well.
Here's a different diagram.
The diagram needs one addition to allow downstream access:
You would need a static route at any upstream router that points to the subnet of any downstream router if you want them to connect.

So, on page 1, you could have:
Assume that Router 1 has on the WAN side.
Assume that Router 2 has on the WAN side.

On the Modem/Router static routes as follows: to
and to

On Router 1 static route as follows: to   (where I have given Router 2 here the "" adddress on the WAN side).

This will work with many commodity routers.  I've not found a set where it would not.  But, more sophisticated routers may require upstream-pointing routes as well such as:

On Router 2 there should be no need to point to the 2nd subnet because Router 2 will already have that route.
But, on Router 2 you may have to point to the 1st subnet like this: to

On Router 1 there should be no need to point to the 1st subnet because Router 1 will already have that route.
Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
Thanks to Qlemo I have corrected the subnets mentioned on this diagram.
It's not what you appear to want but just to be complete within the thread.
DCCoolBreezeAuthor Commented:
I appreciate the help.  While excellent diagram and example, the new example provided does not work in my case.  I want computers on either subnet to be able to see devices on the other subnet.  The configuration I currently have setup works "upstream", but it does not work downstream.  So I my laptop has an IP in the 192.168.2.x subnet, I can ping/set the devices on the 192.168.1.x subnet.  However, if my laptop is on the 192.168.1.x subnet, I cannot see the devices on the 192.168.2.x subnet.  The Verizon FIOS wireless/modem/router uses the 192.168.1.x subnet and provides the internet service.  I have a static route setup and firewall rules setup on the FIOS router.   Since I connected the Verizon router LAN port to the Belkin WAN port, the Belkin WAN subnet is 192.168.1.x.   When I attempted to setup a static route from the Belkin router to the Verizon router's subnet (192.168.1.x) I get an error that I need to select a different IP address, because 192.168.1.x is the WAN's subnet --- which is exactly right.  The Belkin WAN IP is 192.168.1.x as it should be since the connection to that WAN port originates from the LAN port of the Verizon router.   So, all the say, how can I get devices on router 192.168.1.x (upstream router) to see devices on 192.168.2.x
Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
I anticipated the downstream issue and tried to explain how to do it using the diagram AND the words in my last response.  Sorry if I wasn't clear.

You don't need a route from the Belkin to the Verizon because they are on the same subnet and are "known" to one another so to speak.  If you look at the routing table on the Belkin, it will already be there.  But, it may be to which encompasses everything outside ... that is, the Verizon is the default Gateway for the Belkin.

You need to set up a static route in the Verizon like this: to 192.168.1.xxx where 192.168.1.xxx is the IP of the WAN port of the Belkin.
When packets arrive at the Belkin destined for, they will be routed to the Belkin LAN switch ports.  The Belkin routing table should already reflect this.

Further explanation:
- A device on the subnet tries to send a packet to a device on the subnet.
- Because this packet is destined for a "foreign" subnet, it will be directed to the gateway (the Verizon in your case) as the next hop.
- The gateway will do one of two things:
  .. if it doesn't know where the subnet is, it may well drop the packet.
  .. if it has a route to the subnet, it will direct the packet according to that route.
  (so then the packet is put back out on the same LAN as where it originated but now it will be destined for the Belkin's IP address).

From this you can see that there is an alternate, although less convenient, method.
You could put the route in all the PCs that need it: to 192.168.1.xxx (the Belkin).
route -p add 192.168.1.xxx 1
... something like that.

This is easy enough but you have to "touch" all the computers in that subnet if that's your intent.  So, it's generally preferable to enter the route one time in the gateway device.
DCCoolBreezeAuthor Commented:
OK.  my verizon modem provides the following fields for static routes (Fields: Values I entered):

Name:  Home Network
Gateway:  (this is the WAN port IP, the Gateway is - which also does not work)
Net Mask:
Metric: 3 (I only have two routers, but entered 3)

Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP):  Checked
Doman Routing: Not Checked

Unfortunately, this configuration did not work...

Of note, when I changed the Gateway from to the WAN IP port and pinged at device on 192.168.2.x, I got the following:

PING ( 56(84) bytes of data.
From icmp_seq=1 Redirect Host(New nexthop:
--- ping statistics ---
10 packets transmitted, 0 received, +1 errors, 100% packet loss, time 9065ms
Fred MarshallPrincipalCommented:
I tried this on a commodity Linksys router and got the same result as you did.
So, I have to believe now that the downstream routing won't work - perhaps on any router or at least any commodity router like Linksys or Belkin.
All of the instructions they give  (as few as they are) suggest it should work.
Sorry, I really thought that it would.

Yet, a trace route from the upstream subnet to the downstream subnet does NOT include the downstream router IP.  There is no response from it.  This suggests the upstream router is dropping the packets even though there is a route for them.

I guess you might be better off LAN to LAN on those routers.

Of course, the downstream router was configured in Gateway mode / i.e. NAT.
But even set up in Router mode, it seemed to make no difference.
In the mean time, the upstream router has to be set in Gateway mode.  So no change possible to test there - even though for this route NAT in the upstream router wouldn't be in the intended route.

Featured Post

Evaluating UTMs? Here's what you need to know!

Evaluating a UTM appliance and vendor can prove to be an overwhelming exercise.  How can you make sure that you're getting the security that your organization needs without breaking the bank? Check out our UTM Buyer's Guide for more information on what you should be looking for!

  • 5
  • 3
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now