Subnet to Subnet router

[msbald]

Remember when a router was a router. Is anyone familiar w/ a router that can route packets both ways between two subnets (ie 192.168.1.x and 192.168.2.x) You used to be able to disable nat firewalls and turn these internet connection sharing routers into a REAL router via software configs but I have tried several to no avail. I tried cheating and making one subnet the "internet" and the other the LAN but only got host to host traffic in one direction. NAT only showed the "wan" port in the other direction. I know I can build a linux based "old computer" solution but like the reliability, "configure and forget" and space requirements of the "REAL" router

TIA for any help

 

[bcastner]

Do not connect router #1 to the WAN port of router #2.

. disable DHCP on router #2
. connect (you may need a cross-over cable) router #1 regular LAN port with a patch cable to a regular LAN port on router #2
. You, depending on routers, could use RIP2, or OSPF, or just make a static route

 

[msbald]

Tks for the response but this kinda misses the mark and makes the problem too complicated. I want one router to sit between two subnets and route packes between them. The analogous situation is that if subnet A was the lan and subnet B was the internet. The problem is that I want every computer on A to see every computer on B and vise versa (Obviously this is bad if B is the internet). When internet gateways came out you used to be able to turn them into pure routers (this is what I want), no NAT, no Firewall just something to take packets, when appropriate, from one side to the other.

 

[msbald]

In addition I intend to add static routes on each machine so if the 1.x subnet has the router on 192.168.1.25 and the 2.x subnet has the router at 192.168.2.25 then on machines in the 1.x subnet I type from cmd prompt-
route add 192.168.2.0 mask 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.25 -p

and from the 2.x subnet
route add 192.168.2.0 mask 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.25 -p

then all machines will send their internet traffic and non local traffic to the default gateway and traffic for the other net to the .25 on their local subnet and on to the other subnet.

 

[bcastner]

You may not be able to do this with a consumer/SOHO class router.

The routers firmware should support a static route. You can try this at the client level as you suggest above.

But one of the concerns I have is that it is not IP traffic, per se, you want to route, but Netbios information from each client as well.

What you want in the middle is a DNS and WINS server level product to resolve HOST names.

 

[dk87]

So are you saying that you want to route from your LAN to the internet or from LAN to LAN? Or are you saying that you want all public IP's on a LAN? Or are you pining for the old days when NAT was NAT and not PAT? Sorry, but I'm confused...

 

[msbald]

Bcastner, tks for the response. I dont see how Netbios info would be a problem if I can get network traffice where it needs to go. These are two smaller networks (ie 1 or 2 servers and 20 odd workstations) I was going to have hosts file handle name resolution and basically just want users on each side to occasionally access files or a printer (statically installed) on the other side. I have a wireless bridge setup (it functions like a wired connection and I didn't want to complicate the description) and didn't want to join both sides to the same subnet. Each side has a dedicated internet connection. I have built a linux router from an old celeron box and a couple of NICs using

http://www.freesco.org/

's solution and it has worked in the lab. I will let you know if it works in the field.

DK87 - As the above shows, the requirement was for LAN to LAN routing. It's hard to pine in this business but I did like it when I could buy a consumer or SOHO router that was mostly designed to share internet access and turn it into a router. In the past I have used these to replace more power hungry and costly NT computer based routers between subnets but these configs don't seem to be available in today's products (my pine is showing) - tks for the response, sorry for the confusion. Doesn't anyone subnet anymore?

 

[bierhunter]

Many of the soho internet sharing routers still have the feature where you can disable the WAN NAT stuff and just do normal routing. The Linksys routers I used to use at home could do that. Sorry, though I don't remember the settings, but the website has the docs. I'm on a Cisco 831 now and can set it up however I wish.

It really depends upon what brand of router you are using, but the ability should still be there these days.

BierHunter
CNE, MCSE, CCNP

 

[msbald]

The afore mentioned linux solution worked like a charm. Bierhuner, I was trying to do it on site w/ equipment on hand (Dlink wireless and another off brand). I spent 1.5 hrs on Linksys chat and sent emails but no one I was able to contact could provide me w/ a current product that would do it, though I had done it in the past as you suggested. The good news is that I now have a use for old boxes (and I hate to toss working systems) or spend $400 for router. A power supply, floppy, mobo chip and some ram and viola! There is a whole lot of other features on the freeSCO solution that I hope to have time to delve into. Tks everyone for the suggestions/comments

 

[bcastner]

bierhunter,

I am not certain what Linksys router you used in the past, but any current one or any SOHO class router will not accomodate the routing requested by the original poster without a bridge router.

You can create as many static routes, or enable any routing protocol you care to. You will not see intra-subnet routing for private IPIA subnets unless you spend the money for a router that supports VLANs and intra-VLAN routing.

I have been a Linksys BETA tester for six years, and in my job I see and test offerings from most of the SOHO and large class router manufacturers. You cannot do this without a router to bridge the two subnets using something like RIP2 on all subnets, and all routers. There is no static entry or protocol entry that would resolve this issue. These are level two devices, and the capability is not there. It is sad to see so many frustrated folks trying as hard as they can to define Gateways with these devices on a different subnet.

 

[bierhunter]

The one I had was just a basic 4-port Linksys router. It had the option to disable the Internet/NAT function and use it as a normal subnet to subnet router. It worked fine. The functions were limited of course. One subnet to one subnet only. And of course no VLANs (but that wasn't mentioned in the original post either)


BierHunter
CNE, MCSE, CCNP

 

[msbald]

Bierhunter,
What model BEFSR41? I did not have one to try and Linksys techsupport would not confirm that it would work. After reading your post I got a look at the config pages and while there was a "working mode" setting that could go from gateway to router on the dynamic routing tab (along w/ the RIP protocols for Tx and Rxh) and static routing tab. Bcastner, is this one of the models you have tested? Does is qualify as a "bridge" router? It looked promising but I saw no "disable nat" setting. Perhaps the working mode takes care of that? Tks for the info bier, I will get my hands on one and try it. While I am happy w/ the freeSCO solution (which could join up to 8 subnets per its docs and I enabled no RIP protocol) I always like to have other options.

 

[Serbtastic]

The BEFSR41 does have a router mode that is supposed to be able to route between subnets. I cannot find more information, but would be curious to know if anyone has been able to make this work. If so, it may be worth picking one up.