router -> bridge
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Hactar on June 2, 2008, 5:07 pm
Please log in for more thread options RSS feeds from outside as well as access my SMB shares locally. It only has a hardwore ethernet jack and no slots. It also would be impractical to run an ethernet cable to it, so it'll have to be a wireless <->
ethernet bridge. To that end, I got a router which supports "bridge"
mode, an Actiontec MI424WR (revision D). There's another one in the house (earlier revision though), so the interface is familiar. The manual says that to make it an IP bridge, I need to set it to have no IP address. (Actually, it says that having no IP address is useful when configuring it as a bridge.) Fair enough. However, the message it pops up before it does that scares me. It says: "Configuring an internal connection to have no IP address will make it inaccessible". I can see that. 1. Is that step necessary? Can't I do this: NAT NAT (( net )) -- router #1 -- 192.168.1.x (router #2) -- 192.168.2.x (xbox) `- 192.168.1.x ( ... ) `- ... 2. If it is necessary, how do I access the router afterward? -- -eben QebWenE01R@vTerYizUonI.nOetP http://royalty.mine.nu:81 An ASCII character walks into a bar and orders a double. "Having a bad day?" asks the barman. "Yeah, I have a parity error," replies the ASCII chrcter. The barman says, "Yeah, I thought you looked a bit off." - Skud | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Airman Thunderbird on June 2, 2008, 9:11 pm
Please log in for more thread options the network. It would still be visible if you know the IP address. In the worst case, you could physically reset the device to default specs. You don't HAVE to let DHCP handle the bridge IP.I have a bridge set to a fixed IP address and it works fine in my network, just make sure the number won't conflict with your DHCP server. For example, I have my access points and router set at 192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.2, etc.: then have the DHCP serving router start at 192.168.1.100: no worries. Hactar wrote: > I have a device I want to put on the LAN (an Xbox v. 1), so it can get
> RSS feeds from outside as well as access my SMB shares locally. It only > has a hardwore ethernet jack and no slots. It also would be impractical > to run an ethernet cable to it, so it'll have to be a wireless <-> > ethernet bridge. To that end, I got a router which supports "bridge" > mode, an Actiontec MI424WR (revision D). There's another one in the house > (earlier revision though), so the interface is familiar. > > The manual says that to make it an IP bridge, I need to set it to have > no IP address. (Actually, it says that having no IP address is useful > when configuring it as a bridge.) Fair enough. However, the message > it pops up before it does that scares me. It says: "Configuring an > internal connection to have no IP address will make it inaccessible". > I can see that. > > 1. Is that step necessary? Can't I do this: > > NAT NAT > (( net )) -- router #1 -- 192.168.1.x (router #2) -- 192.168.2.x (xbox) > `- 192.168.1.x ( ... ) > `- ... > > 2. If it is necessary, how do I access the router afterward? > | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Hactar on June 2, 2008, 10:07 pm
Please log in for more thread options > Hactar wrote:
> >
> > The manual says that to make it an IP bridge, I need to set it to have > > no IP address. (Actually, it says that having no IP address is useful > > when configuring it as a bridge.) Fair enough. However, the message > > it pops up before it does that scares me. It says: "Configuring an > > internal connection to have no IP address will make it inaccessible". > > I can see that. > > > > 1. Is that step necessary? Can't I do this: snip > > 2. If it is necessary, how do I access the router afterward?
> That's what you're trying to do is make it transparent to the rest of
> the network. It would still be visible if you know the IP address. IP address of what? The attached device? At port 80 (www) still? And does it go in the WAN port or one of the LAN ports, or does it matter? > You don't HAVE to let DHCP handle the bridge IP.
For most of the other devices around here I have DHCP assign a fixed address. DHCP doesn't require a dynamic address after all. > I have a bridge set to a
> fixed IP address and it works fine in my network, just make sure the > number won't conflict with your DHCP server. For example, I have my > access points and router set at 192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.2, etc.: then > have the DHCP serving router start at 192.168.1.100: no worries. Sure. Also, I think I have a decent handle on what needs to happen theoretically. Any idea how I configure the router to make that happen actually? -- -eben QebWenE01R@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81 My parents went to a planet where the inhabitants have no bilateral symmetry, and all I got was this lousy F-shirt. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Airman Thunderbird on June 3, 2008, 9:31 pm
Please log in for more thread options If you use a DHCP address from your server, you won't know what the
address is, hence the "Configuring an internal connection to have no IP address will make it inaccessible". Give it a fixed address and plug your Xbox in after configuring the bridge. Hactar wrote: >> Hactar wrote:
>>> The manual says that to make it an IP bridge, I need to set it to have
>>> no IP address. (Actually, it says that having no IP address is useful >>> when configuring it as a bridge.) Fair enough. However, the message >>> it pops up before it does that scares me. It says: "Configuring an >>> internal connection to have no IP address will make it inaccessible". >>> I can see that. >>> >>> 1. Is that step necessary? Can't I do this: >
> snip > >>> 2. If it is necessary, how do I access the router afterward?
>
>> That's what you're trying to do is make it transparent to the rest of
>> the network. It would still be visible if you know the IP address. >
> IP address of what? The attached device? At port 80 (www) still? And > does it go in the WAN port or one of the LAN ports, or does it matter? > >> You don't HAVE to let DHCP handle the bridge IP.
>
> For most of the other devices around here I have DHCP assign a fixed > address. DHCP doesn't require a dynamic address after all. > >> I have a bridge set to a
>> fixed IP address and it works fine in my network, just make sure the >> number won't conflict with your DHCP server. For example, I have my >> access points and router set at 192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.2, etc.: then >> have the DHCP serving router start at 192.168.1.100: no worries. >
> Sure. > > Also, I think I have a decent handle on what needs to happen > theoretically. Any idea how I configure the router to make that happen > actually? > | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Hactar on June 3, 2008, 11:07 pm
Please log in for more thread options >
> >> Hactar wrote:
> >>> The manual says that to make it an IP bridge, I need to set it to have > >>> no IP address. (Actually, it says that having no IP address is useful > >>> when configuring it as a bridge.) Fair enough. However, the message > >>> it pops up before it does that scares me. It says: "Configuring an > >>> internal connection to have no IP address will make it inaccessible". > >>> I can see that. >
> If you use a DHCP address from your server, you won't know what the > address is, hence the "Configuring an internal connection to have no IP > address will make it inaccessible". Give it a fixed address and plug > your Xbox in after configuring the bridge. OK. I don't see an obvious way of having the wifi circuitry be just another device on router #1's net and not broadcast its own SSID. Any clues? -- -eben QebWenE01R@vTerYizUonI.nOetP royalty.mine.nu:81 > A: It's annoying as hell
http://www.fscked.co.uk/writing/top-posting-cuss.html > Q: Why do most people hate top-posting? -- Lots42 The Library Avenger | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Router and Bridge | January 25, 2005, 7:26 pm |
| router -> bridge | June 2, 2008, 5:07 pm |
| SMC Barricade router as a bridge? | July 21, 2005, 1:43 pm |
| SMC Barricade router as a bridge? | July 21, 2005, 1:43 pm |
| Wireless bridge or wirless router? | January 6, 2006, 8:10 am |
| using linksys WRT54G as bridge and router | April 30, 2007, 5:51 pm |
| Can wifi router become a "ethernet bridge"? | May 16, 2007, 6:31 pm |
| Bridge 2 AP with router(client) mode | August 1, 2007, 6:20 pm |
| D-link dsl router as a wireless bridge | July 15, 2008, 7:46 am |
| Converting a wireless router to act as a network bridge. | December 8, 2006, 3:11 pm |
| Adding wired router to a wireless bridge | March 2, 2007, 10:23 am |
| Network Bridge between a cable and a ADSL router | April 6, 2007, 6:07 am |
| Netgear ME101 bridge and Linksys Befsr41 router | December 7, 2004, 12:46 am |
| Entending a Wireless LAN - Access Point, Bridge or Router? | January 24, 2005, 1:31 am |
| Wireless bridge + switch. (client mode router) | February 19, 2006, 8:16 pm |