Dealing with multiple layers of routers

Neil Schelly neil at jenandneil.com
Wed Jun 7 13:24:02 EDT 2006


On Wednesday 07 June 2006 12:09 pm, Bill Freeman wrote:
> I think that what I need to do is disable NAT and firewall on the Linksys.
> (We would still be protected from the internet by the firewall in the
> Netgear.)  If that's possible.  Then would I be able to configure the
> Netgear's DHCP server to tell the wired folks to route to 192.168.1 via
> the IP that the Linksys has on the 192.168.0 network?  Or woould it be
> possible to hide the static route from 192.168.0 to 192.168.1 entirely
> in the Netgear's internal routing rules?  (The wireless folks already
> go to the Linksys for routing to 192.168.0, since it's not within their
> local network's netmask.)  Or am I likely to have to hand configure all
> the wired guys with a static route to 192.168.1?
>
> Or I guess I might be able to connect the routers via downstream ports on
> both, using a cross over cable.  Then I either need to disable DHCP on
> the Linksys (that I'm sure that I can do), or arrange for both DHCP servers
> to specify a 255.255.254.0 netmask, and the Netgear as the router to the
> internet.  (I'd actually like to keep the wireless guys with 192.168.1
> addresses and the wired guys with 192.168.0 addesses, but this is a much
> softer requirement.)
>
> I'd appreciate comments and (some of the) suggestions.


I've got setups like this and even in my home. That said, I've got wireless 
and wired users in the same subnet in that case.  I would suggest just 
plugging a normal port in each router together. That way, you're using the 
wireless router itself as more of a wireless hub (access point) instead of as 
a router.

If you want to split up the subnet between wired and wireless users, you may 
have to get more creative.  You could certainly give static DHCP assignments 
to MAC addresses that you know are in the wireless segment for example.  
-N



More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list