Managed service contracts are great - when they're making you money. Yes, you’re getting paid monthly, but is it actually profitable? Learn to calculate your hourly overhead burden so you can master your IT services pricing strategy.
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
Asked:
Who is Participating?
Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by
Enjoy your complimentary solution view.
Get this solution by purchasing an Individual license!
Start your 7-day free trial.
I wear a lot of hats...
"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.
Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by
Your issues matter to us.
Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.
Start your 7-day free trial
What are the netmasks? /24 would separate 4.x & 5.x while a /23 (or smaller) those networks are joined....
All systems in the same network NEED to have the same netmask. (Otherwise they are on a different network, by definition).
All systems in the same network NEED to have the same netmask. (Otherwise they are on a different network, by definition).
Much agree that you that you need ONE subnet. Did ATT put wired / wireless on different subnets? Bad idea that.
Ask ATT again to put all on one subnet.
Ask ATT again to put all on one subnet.
I would look mainly in certain areas: The DHCP settings, along with the actually IP settings of the router.
This small office customer recently changed to AT&T for their ISP.
<flame>
Having just dropped AT&T after three weeks of non-response to internet problems ...
Well, that's a problem right there. Pretty much any other ISP would be preferable.
</flame>
<flame>
Having just dropped AT&T after three weeks of non-response to internet problems ...
Well, that's a problem right there. Pretty much any other ISP would be preferable.
</flame>
Put the WAPs on the same subnet as the gateway? A 192.168.x.x/24 is the best one can do given network subnet norms/RFCs.
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...
If your PCs are getting out to the Internets then they are getting to the gateway, which means that they are most likely configured with a broader netmask than the /24 normally expected on a 192.168.x.x net. Someone higher up mentioned a /23, it could also be a /22 or higher as well.
Go to one of the PC's and run ipconfig, check the mask. Or, if you have access to the router itself (sounds like you might) then check the interface configuration for the LAN side:
show run int Fa/Gi X/X/Y
Confirm the mask.
If it is anything other than /24 (255.255.255.0), then change it appropriately on the radios. If you need a reference for the CIDR to DoDe translation then check this link:
https://kb.wisc.edu/ns/pag
Go to one of the PC's and run ipconfig, check the mask. Or, if you have access to the router itself (sounds like you might) then check the interface configuration for the LAN side:
show run int Fa/Gi X/X/Y
Confirm the mask.
If it is anything other than /24 (255.255.255.0), then change it appropriately on the radios. If you need a reference for the CIDR to DoDe translation then check this link:
https://kb.wisc.edu/ns/pag
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.
Two Solutions
(1) Change the subnet from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.254.0 OR (Radio must be support VLSM - Variable Length Subnet Mask)
(2) Change the IP address of all computers to 192.168.4.0/24
What ever is convenient to you.
(1) Change the subnet from 255.255.255.0 to 255.255.254.0 OR (Radio must be support VLSM - Variable Length Subnet Mask)
(2) Change the IP address of all computers to 192.168.4.0/24
What ever is convenient to you.
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.
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Routers
From novice to tech pro — start learning today.
Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by
Enjoy your complimentary solution view.
Get this solution by purchasing an Individual license!
Start your 7-day free trial.