Gateway is on different subnet than IP addresses
This small office customer recently changed to AT&T for their ISP. Looking at ipconfig, their PCs are all 192.168.5.x, but their gateway is 192.168.4.1. All the PCs get "automatic" IP addresses, and they all access the internet and their local network just fine.
The problem comes in when I need to set new addresses on their two wireless radios. We always set them up with static IPs. If I try to set up the static IP as 192.168.5.232, and the gateway as 192.168.4.1, I get an error saying both must be in the same subnet.
Trying to get fast, qualified help from AT&T while I'm here on site is going to be impossible, based on past experience. I'm hoping someone here at e-e knows what, if anything I can do to get the IP addresses and the gateway in the same subnet, or some other solution that will work. I am accustomed to seeing both in the subnet everywhere I go, so I'm lost as to why it is this way, and what to do about it. TIA
The problem comes in when I need to set new addresses on their two wireless radios. We always set them up with static IPs. If I try to set up the static IP as 192.168.5.232, and the gateway as 192.168.4.1, I get an error saying both must be in the same subnet.
Trying to get fast, qualified help from AT&T while I'm here on site is going to be impossible, based on past experience. I'm hoping someone here at e-e knows what, if anything I can do to get the IP addresses and the gateway in the same subnet, or some other solution that will work. I am accustomed to seeing both in the subnet everywhere I go, so I'm lost as to why it is this way, and what to do about it. TIA
I would look mainly in certain areas: The DHCP settings, along with the actually IP settings of the router.
If I try to set up the static IP as 192.168.5.232, and the gateway as 192.168.4.1, I get an error saying both must be in the same subnet.Did you ever try setting their IP addresses as 192.168.4.x? Might be a way around things until you get it all sorted. But I would think you could configure the router...
BTW gateway can never be on a different subnet, that doesn;t work... So if it works the subnet must be bigger than you thought..
@masnrock the netmasks need to be the same even then so not a solution... If the other currently works the conclusion must be that the netmask is smaller (==> the network is bigger).
/32 = 255.255.255.255 = 11111111.11111111.11111111
...
/23 = 255.255.254.0 = 11111111.11111111.11111110
/22 = 255.255.252.0 = 11111111.11111111.11111100
/21 = 255.255.248.0 = 11111111.11111111.11111000
/20 = 255.255.240.0 = 11111111.11111111.11110000
/19 = 255.255.224.0 = 11111111.11111111.11100000
/18 = 255.255.192.0 = 11111111.11111111.11000000
/17 = 255.255.128.0 = 11111111.11111111.10000000
....
/0 = 0.0.0.0.0 = 00000000.00000000.00000000
(the netmask shift one bit to the left each time...)
@masnrock the netmasks need to be the same even then so not a solution... If the other currently works the conclusion must be that the netmask is smaller (==> the network is bigger).
/32 = 255.255.255.255 = 11111111.11111111.11111111
...
/23 = 255.255.254.0 = 11111111.11111111.11111110
/22 = 255.255.252.0 = 11111111.11111111.11111100
/21 = 255.255.248.0 = 11111111.11111111.11111000
/20 = 255.255.240.0 = 11111111.11111111.11110000
/19 = 255.255.224.0 = 11111111.11111111.11100000
/18 = 255.255.192.0 = 11111111.11111111.11000000
/17 = 255.255.128.0 = 11111111.11111111.10000000
....
/0 = 0.0.0.0.0 = 00000000.00000000.00000000
(the netmask shift one bit to the left each time...)
By the time I had finished posting this question, I found the business owner on the phone with AT&T--and she insisted that I talk with them. After FOUR HOURS of holding, being transferred, being disconnected, and trying to communicate in a foreign language, even talking with confused Level 2 techs, I found this morning that nothing had been fixed, because everyone still had 192.168.5.x addresses. And I could do nothing about it, because this is a "managed router" that AT&T would not let me access.
Long story short, today I had to set static IPs on several devices in the 192.68.4.x range in order to make them work. This was something I could not do yesterday, so I guess it is fair to say they AT&T tech support did "something"--but I don't know what. The customer still has a gateway of 192.168.4.1, and a subnet mask of 255.255.252.0, and most of the PCs still have automatic 192.168.5.x addresses. But the ones I set static in the 192.168.4.x range now work as well, so at this point I'll have to give up and go with it.
Long story short, today I had to set static IPs on several devices in the 192.68.4.x range in order to make them work. This was something I could not do yesterday, so I guess it is fair to say they AT&T tech support did "something"--but I don't know what. The customer still has a gateway of 192.168.4.1, and a subnet mask of 255.255.252.0, and most of the PCs still have automatic 192.168.5.x addresses. But the ones I set static in the 192.168.4.x range now work as well, so at this point I'll have to give up and go with it.
You can always put your own Wireless Router on one subnet and use that subnet for your network. Additional router, but that should work fine.
Given the way you initially said things were configured, it almost sounds there was a very weird router misconfiguration at the start.
Honestly, the best solution was suggested by Dr Klahn far at the beginning: dump AT&T. If that's the type of support you're getting at the start, it surely isn't going to get any better. What alternatives are available that meet your client's needs?
Your own router is only going to help so much: you would have to opt for a subnet that doesnt overlap with the existing one in the AT&T router. Obviously there is also that double NAT thing.
Honestly, the best solution was suggested by Dr Klahn far at the beginning: dump AT&T. If that's the type of support you're getting at the start, it surely isn't going to get any better. What alternatives are available that meet your client's needs?
Your own router is only going to help so much: you would have to opt for a subnet that doesnt overlap with the existing one in the AT&T router. Obviously there is also that double NAT thing.
The customer still has a gateway of 192.168.4.1, and a subnet mask of 255.255.252.0Here you say it... your (sub)NETMASK is 255.255.252.0 so set THAT on every device. (/22)
You may now have devices with 192.168.4.x netmask 255.255.255.0 (/24) ==> those will FAIL for some devices.
on the existing network. (because broadcast addresses dont match for
192.168.4.x/22 = 192.168.7.255 with 192.168.4.x/24 = 192.168.4.255 so anything broadcast based WILL fail in that setup to reach 192.168.5.0 - 192.168.5.254 . and station @192.168.4.255 might really be interesting... to have as user.
Gain unlimited access to on-demand training courses with an Experts Exchange subscription.
Get AccessWhy Experts Exchange?
Experts Exchange always has the answer, or at the least points me in the correct direction! It is like having another employee that is extremely experienced.
Jim Murphy
Programmer at Smart IT Solutions
When asked, what has been your best career decision?
Deciding to stick with EE.
Mohamed Asif
Technical Department Head
Being involved with EE helped me to grow personally and professionally.
Carl Webster
CTP, Sr Infrastructure Consultant
Did You Know?
We've partnered with two important charities to provide clean water and computer science education to those who need it most. READ MORE
Ask ANY Question
Connect with Certified Experts to gain insight and support on specific technology challenges including:
- Troubleshooting
- Research
- Professional Opinions