WAN IP (or lack of)

I ditched my old DLink router to get a shiny Linksys WRT54GX4, and got nothing but disconnects ever since. From reading these forums it seem to be a real issue with a lot of peoplewith this series of routers. Do I need to return this while I still have the chance? From the day I installed this router, you can be browsing fine then it is like someone wipes the WAN connection clean. The LAN side wired and/or wireless stays completely intact. I can log into the router with no problem and see the WAN down, and it will not renew addressing from the cable modem (Ambit - Charter). I can wire my laptop directly to the cable modem, hit the modems DHCP, and be browsing with no problem. I have even tried putting the WAN side of the router on a static address on the cable modems network. Flaky WAN port maybe?
So far, I have updated the firmware, restart modem and router, and defaulting the settings on multiple occasions to start with a new setup. I work in IT and have set up MANY wireless networks, but this thing has got me ready to toss it out the window. That said...I am open to any suggestions, and any help would be most appreciated. I really like this router and it's features so I would love to get the wrinkles smoothed out if possible.
thanks,
jb

i am pretty much competent you've done everything.. you even have assigned static WAN IP and and DNSs from the modem itself.. if that's the case, that router, I believe has a lose WAN port and is needed to be replaced already while you still have the chance...
"a helping hand in a community makes the world a universe"

Similar Messages

Is this a router bug or my lack of understanding routing?

I have a WAN connected router which is configured for a range of 8(6) IPs from our ISP. - ip address 101.102.103.250 255.255.255.248
The default gateway address is 101.102.103.249 and this is the next hop on the ISP link to us.
This is working just fine for this primary IP of .250. But we are not receiving any traffic for the other IPs in the range .251 .252 .253 .254
Ive tested this with PING, TRACEROUTE and SSH.
Now if I go and create a NAT rule that translates traffic for one of those IPs, then we get traffic successfully.
It is like the IP is not recognised as 'alive' until something specifically receives it.
But it gets weirder...
I ran packet captures and found that ICMP traffic is not even being received for these 'dead' IP addresses.
Am I missing something fundamental here?

Its your lack of understanding of routing/addressing/NAT/ARP :)
101.102.103.248/29 is a 8ip (6hosts) range, you are right.. BUT
the command "ip address 101.102.103.250 255.255.255.248" applied to your router, is only 1 ip, not a range of IP. Your router ip is .250 and the ISP ip is .249, So unless you are using a ip pool on your NAT configuration, you are only using the .250 IP
When you configure a static NAT using one of the other IP's on the range, or a NAT pool, the router uses proxy-arp on the Outside interface to signal the ISP that those IPs are also "alive" on the same router besides the one already configured (.250).
If a Static NAT or a NAT pool is not configured, the router will only respond to ARP requests for its own ip (.250), that's why you don't see any traffic for the .251, .252, etc.

"conflicts with the WAN IP address"

I just picked up a used AirPort Extreme N (Gigabit Ethernet) to replace my current non-Apple router, which has worked satisfactorily but lacks the ability to share disks--something I need. Using my G5 running 10.4.11, I downloaded AirPort Utility 5.4.2 to set up the new (to me) device, and did a factory reset just to clear everything out. I placed the AirPort in the network exactly where the old one had been--with its WAN port connected to the line supplied by my ISP (see below) and its three other ethernet ports connected to various clients. Then I ran into a problem:
Under the "Internet" icon of Airport Utility, I set it to Connect Using Ethernet, and Configure IPv4 using DHCP (My current router uses DHCP to provide IP addresss to both the wired and wireless devices on my network). The numbers below that are: IP address 192.168.1.12, subnet mask 255.255.255.0, and router address 192.168.1.1.
The first field of the line labeled "DNS Server(s)" defaults to 192.168.1.1, while the second field is empty, as are the fields Domain Name and DHCP Client ID. I left Ethernet WAN port on "Automatic" and put "Connection Sharing" on "Share a Public IP address," since I believe its combination of DHCP and NAT offer the best security.
The problem: When I click the "Update" button to confirm my settings, I get this message: "The DHCP range you have entered conflicts with the WAN IP address of your Apple wireless device."
Although I am unclear as to why the Internet Connection pane of the AirPort Utility lists "IP address" and "Router address" as two separate numbers (aren't they referring to the same device, the AirPort itself? How can it have two IP addresses?), I figured that I could play it safe and change the starting number to 192.168.1.13 to avoid the conflicts with 192.168.1.12.
But I still get the same error message when pressing "update." I tried changing the range to 192.168.1.50 - 192.168.1.60, and I still get the same error message. There seems to be no range that the utility will accept as non-conflicting with the "WAN IP address" of the Airport.
My ISP did not provide a visible modem as others in the past have done. The internet connection they left me simply comes out of a box on the back of the house that is connected by fiber optics to (presumably) a fiber optic line out in the street. However, this "supply line" has always worked fine with my non-Apple router and--after disconnecting the AirPort that had temporarily taken its place--is working right now as I throw this question to the forum.
Additional notes:
* Under the NAT tab, the box "Enable NAT Port Mapping Protocol" is checked, as it was by default) while "Enable default host at" is unchecked and blank.
* While I currently have wireless turned on in the AirPort, I haven't even tried wireless connectivity yet and want to make sure my wired connectivity is working first.
Thanks for any assistance.

The problem: When I click the "Update" button to confirm my settings, I get this message: "The DHCP range you have entered conflicts with the WAN IP address of your Apple wireless device."
This error message typically indicates that your 802.11n AirPort Extreme Base Station (AEBSn) is receiving a Private (as opposed to a Public IP address) on its WAN port. That could be because your ISP does not provide any device (computer or router), that is directly connected to their "box," with a Public IP address.
Your AEBSn is both a DHCP client (on the WAN-side) and a DHCP server (on the LAN-side). The Configure IPv4 is basically the on/off switch for the AEBSn's DHCP client. It's other option, PPPoE, would only be used if your ISP requires it.
One option would be to reconfigure the AEBSn as a bridge. This would disable both the AEBSn's NAT & DHCP services.
Although I am unclear as to why the Internet Connection pane of the AirPort Utility lists "IP address" and "Router address" as two separate numbers (aren't they referring to the same device, the AirPort itself? How can it have two IP addresses?
The IP address information on (actually the TCP/IP pane) is showing you the AEBSn's WAN port settings. Settings that with Configure IPv4 set to Using DHCP would come from the DHCP server upstream of it. If this server was providing Public IP addresses then the values in both the IP Address & Router Address fields would not be in any of the three valid Private IP Address ranges (10.x, 172.x, or 192.x)
Under the NAT tab, the box "Enable NAT Port Mapping Protocol" is checked, as it was by default) while "Enable default host at" is unchecked and blank.
This setting would not have anything to do with the error message that you are getting. Instead, this option is used as an on/off switch for the NAT-PMP protocol. This protocol is similar to non-AirPorts' UPnP protocol.
While I currently have wireless turned on in the AirPort, I haven't even tried wireless connectivity yet and want to make sure my wired connectivity is working first.
Both wired and wireless clients will be impacted by this until resolved. I again, suggest that you try reconfiguring the AEBSn as a bridge. (ref: AirPort Utility > Select the AEBSn > Manual Setup > Internet > Internet Connection > Connection Sharing = Off (Bridge Mode))

Is a L3 switch able to receive a WAN link? if the WAN circuit presentation is ethernet?

Hi experts,
The question is if a L3 switch is able to receive a WAN link which is Ethernet, at the same way than a router?

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
To add to what Jody has already posted, L3 switches often lack features commonly found on routers. Often such features are WAN related. Jody mentioned one common WAN feature, NAT, but they might also lack certain hardware resources, such as sufficient capacity to take one or more full Internet route tables.
Even when running across MetroE clouds, often LAN L3 switches are still a bit "weak", for such usage, which is why Cisco has a series of MetroE switches.
The forgoing doesn't mean you cannot use a LAN L3 switch, just you need to be careful matching what the switch can do with your WAN feature needs.

Deployment package error when transferring a playlist through WAN

Hi ,
I'm using DMM 5.2.1 and DMP 4305G .I'm using the deployment package to transfer the files to DMPs through the WAN.at once i'm sending to 10 DMPs.
But everytime im getting errors for at least 2 DMPs .I'm attaching the error report generated from the deployment manager .
It mainly indicate as " Socket Closed "
Can anyone please look in to this and suggest me a a solution ..
Thanks

Hello,
Can you manually FTP to the DMP under question and find out how much free space is available on the SD card ?
Specifially Under the following folders :
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-qformat:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin-top:0in;
mso-para-margin-right:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt;
mso-para-margin-left:0in;
line-height:115%;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri;
mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast;
mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;
mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}
1) usb_1/deployment/content and 2) usb_1
The Error Message: Missing or a partial file most probably implies that the file could not be FTP'd due to lack of space on the Internal card.
Make sure your SD card on the DMP is not full.
Try deleting the unwanted locally stored media asset or old files from the Internal storage (USB_1)
Regards,
Sagar Dhanrale

Troubleshooting Airport Extreme's wan port?

I have an Airport Extreme base station that doesn't seem to be communicating through its WAN port. Both Apple and Windoze computers can connect to it, wired or wirelessly, but I am unable to make the base station communicate with a gateway device, a (PPoE) DSL modem. My brother (whose device this is) was having the same problem with his cable modem.
As the Airport boots, the link light on the WAN port blinks green a couple of times, only instantaneously, but otherwise remains dark. Once it's booted, the status light blinks amber. And of course there is no throughput, no connectivity to the Internet.
I also have a LinkSys WiFi router that works perfectly using the same gateway device and the same ethernet cable, which gives me to believe both the modem and the cable are in proper working order. All the configuration information I'm entering into the Airport's web interface I'm cut and pasting from the same text file I habitually use to the LinkSys router (to cut down on clerical errors). So presuming it's configured properly, presuming the cable and the gateway aren't at fault, I have to think the WAN port has given up the ghost.
So I thought to ask the Apple cognoscenti if they agree with my diagnosis. Is there a diagnostic I'm overlooking? Do the WAN ports on these devices have a history of being problematic?
TIA
Slanjevar!

I have discovered the chief problem was that the Airport doesn't take kindly to unresolved/unacknowledged errors/conditions under the Status button on the Summary page of the Airport utility. It was regarding "extended mode" as an abnormality requiring acknowledgment, as well as my switching off all wireless security, as a temporary diagnostic measure. Once I'd told it to 'Ignore' those conditions, I got both a solid green status light and a steady green link light on the WAN port.
However, it still isn't passing data.
As I was stumbling around in the Airport utility's GUI (before resolving the "start button" problem), I noticed it had an "Extend a wireless network" mode. Since what my brother was after in the first place was getting stronger signal to the far end of the house, I asked if this wouldn't better suit his needs than substituting the Airport for his current (underpowered?) WiFi router. He agreed, so I've changed my focus to setting up the Airport as an 'extender.'
Now, reconfigured in 'extender' mode, its 'Status' on the GUI's 'Summary' page shows 'Normal' and the status light is steady green. The GUI for my WRT54 (with DD-WRT firmware) shows it is authenticated and joined to the network, as both a LAN and a wireless client. And the Airport's logs concur: "Joined BSS [WRT54's MAC]" and "Installed unicast TKIP key for authenticator [WRT54's MAC]".
I've done this with the Airport either using DHCP or with a statically configured IP address to see if it made any difference. It does not, either to its ability to join the network or to its (lack of) throughput. So every indication I can find confirms it is a connected and fully functioning member of my network.
I also have an XPSP3 box connected to one of the LAN ports on the Airport. The NICs on both ends show a solid green link light. The Airport's logs acknowledge that the XP box is connected: "Connection accepted from [::ffff:192.168.1.3]". And the XP box can 'ping' the Airport. All of which spells "connected" to me.
However, the XP box can neither draw an IP address (the Airport's DHCP clients list remains empty) nor communicate with anything upstream of the Airport (which it only can do once I have given it a static IP address). If I try to tracert or pathping from the XP box to the WRT54 (via the Airport), it stalls out at the Airport. The response is the same whether I have the Airport's WAN port connected to a LAN port on the WRT54 or not.
Address scheme-wise, my WiFi router (WRT54) is on 192.168.1.1. The XP box that I have connected to the Airport via ethernet has a reserved IP of 192.168.1.3, but now is configured statically to that address because the Airport (seemingly) does not support it contacting the DHCP server. The Airport consistently had been drawing the first available address from the DHCP pool, 192.168.1.10, but now I have it statically configured to .100 because my brother doesn't use DHCP reservations on his network, and I'm replicating how he will configure it to leave nothing to chance. Having a static address saves him grief having to figure out what its address has become should the Airport utility not be able to find it (which seems to be its norm) and he has to connect manually through the Airport utility.
I've spent almost every waking minute tinkering with this thing since midday yesterday and I've not yet seen evidence that the Airport has passed so much as a single bit of data. And it isn't just the WAN port, it doesn't want to pass anything wirelessly either. This thing is about to get my goat. Remind me never again to offer my brother a favor.
Any thoughts? Humorous anecdotes? Naughty limericks?
EDIT:
I also have a network detector on my cell phone than can identify every device, wireless or otherwise, on the network its connected to. But it does not "see" either the Airport or, naturally, the XP box beyond it.

My theory about lack of official response to 3G reception problem

If it's a real problem I think Apple isn't responding because then it would make news everywhere. If it can be fixed with a firmware upgrade then the problem goes away on it's own without having to acknowledge anything. Sure, there will be the few (relatively speaking) people who know they had the problem, but nobody will care once it's resolved.
I actually think the lack of a response might be a good thing because they think they can fix it in firmware. If they can't fix it with a firmware upgrade then they are just digging a deeper hole with every new iPhone they sell.
Of course, my theory could be totally wrong. But in a way I think it makes sense.

+If you read other forums, it's quite clear that the 3G reception issues only happen with US customers+
Not so.. people also post about problems in Switzerland, UK, Japan, Australia... etc.
Its not the signal strength showing on the display but the dropped calls that are the real concern for people.
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1602608&tstart=0&start=855
Message was edited by: Wan Chai Man

Lan and Wan port on Airport express

Hi guys I am wondering if you could help me out with my airport express.
I recently bought an airport express and have it set up as the following:
Router--->ethernet cable in to the Wan of Airport express--->ethernet from Airport Express Lan to computer
This is so that I have hardwired internet to my gaming computer and wifi in my room for all my devices. The problem is, however, next year I will not be in a situation that allows me the same setup. I will be too far away to run an ethernet cable from the router to the airport express. So I have decided I shall use it to join the network wirelessly and relay internet through both the Wan and Lan port (think this is called bridge mode?). I was also intending on connecting an ethernet hub to one of the ports so that I can connect multiple devices, smart tv, macbook, ps3 etc. But having one of the ports exclusively to my gaming pc.
My question is, with both Lan and Wan ports relaying internet to multiple devices, would I see a drop in performance, in particular in regard to my compter? Or is the airport express able to join both the 2.4GHz or 5GHz and relay each connection to a specific lan port?
Unfortunately I am not in a position to test this yet, lacking a 5GHz connection in my halls, so I would appreciate if anyone could help shed some light.
Thank you

is the main router also an apple product? if so, then yes you can extend wirelessly, but if the main router is an apple product, why are you bothering to extend wirelessly at all when the main router's signals should be strong enough?
if the main router is NOT an apple router, then you wil NOT be able to extend it wirelessly period.
in my experience, there are very FEW places you NEED to extend a network wirelessly, and i always recommend against it since there is a big performance decrease.
In the case of a wirelessly extended network, throughput may be reduced to less than 60 percent of that of a single device.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4145

Which Monitoring Tool is best to monitor LAN and WAN

Hi,
CAN ANYONE TELL ME Which Monitoring Tool is best to monitor LAN and WAN.
Waiting for immediate response.
Thanks
Irshad

To start with HP open, this is SNMP-based as well. As it is around for quite a while and delivers support for many vendors, it has become sort of an industry standard. Many other vendors deliver add-ons (even CiscoWorks) to support their products via HP open. That functionality however comes with a price. If you have plenty of money an a large network to manage, HP open might be your best choice.
Cisco Works and other -start-with-C- products are typically used to manage Cisco devices. If you have a fair share of non-cisco boxes around you will find that you cannot see or do everything with them that you might want.
One special thing about CiscoWorks is that it lacks a grapical real-time overview of the network. In my opinion this is a weakness in the product. On the other hand, it has many nice features to manage all kinds of Cisco devices.
My ideal solution is to use both a generic SNMP manager, SNMPc in my case, and CiscoWorks 2000. With SNMPc I can quickly see network node status and do some bandwidth management (baselining). CW2k serves mainly to execute changes (NetConfig) and as a syslogger. It is also used to perform IOS upgrades and to store config files.
I guess this could be done with HP open as well, but our money does not reach far enough to pay for both. SNMPc costs a lot less, both in purchase and in maintenance.
Hope this clarifies things a bit.
Regards,
Leo

Polycom V500 over WAN and QoS

we are trying to run two polycoms over WAN. One side is able to see the other while the other side cannot. The side that is unable to see the other has the following QoS setup on the WAN interface:
srr-queue bandwidth share 10 10 60 20
srr-queue bandwidth shape 10 0 0 0
queue-set 2
msl qos trust dscp
auto qos voip trust

Your configuration is not from a WAN port but from a LAN port. Please note that just because the service provider hands you an Ethernet port, that does not mean you can use any old LAN switch to connect to it. The service provider is using Ethernet to keep their costs down but it is still a WAN port and requires a WAN interface on your terminating equipment to properly schedule and queue the traffic.
Examples of a WAN Ethernet (FastEthernet, GigabitEthernet) port are most any ISR router, a Catalyst Metro switch (i.e. 3750-METRO), the WAN blades on a 6500 switch (not LAN blades!), or the Ethernet WAN/Metro SPA adapters for a 6500/7600 SIP module.
Note that a LAN switch assumes high speed interfaces and not much of a speed mismatch between ports. A LAN port connected to a slow WAN will not be able to buffer anywhere close to amount of traffic that comes through the switch to this port and will cause a HOL (head of line) blocking scenario; and this assumes you setup the port speed and shaping/sharing parameters correctly.
A LAN switch port output buffers are measured in K and will handle 4 to 10 packets of bursting; on the other hand, a WAN port's output buffers are measured in M and will handle thousands of packets of burst.
The effects can be staggering. It is not uncommon for a service provider WAN/MAN to be terminated with a bunch of cheap LAN switches that drop upwards of 90% of the traffic destined for the WAN! Just because of lack of buffers on the output queue side and massive oversubscription between the LAN side and the WAN side, using a LAN port.
And we haven't even started talking about traffic shaping yet to match the speed of transmission from a WAN port to that of the contracted rate such that it doesn't exceed the speed on the receiving side.
Remember, regardless of the size of the WAN port (T1, E1, DS-3, OC-3, 10Mb, 100Mb, 1000Mb), the 'width' of the connection is serial and still only 1 bit wide. Just the rate of bits being sent per second is different.
The key concept that often gets lost is if you have a GigabitEthernet port on a LAN switch connected to a WAN or MAN in which you are purchasing 200Mb of service, you are, by definition, dropping 80% of the traffic in the service provider network (or at the ingress port to the service provider!). This is regardless of how 'busy' or utilized the GigabitEthernet link is. A single packet of data, say 500 bytes, will be sent out the GigabitEthernet port at 1 *billion* bits per second. Unfortunately, you may only have paid for 200 *million* bits per second as your contracted access to the service provider's network. Trust me, the service provider will deal with this discrepancy by policing 80% of your data to the bit bucket and they don't care what type of data it is.
So it doesn't matter how much data you are sending, a 1% utilized WAN connection using a LAN switch in this way could still be dropping 80% (or more) of the traffic!
A final note: Please don't be confused by most switch vendor's terminology regarding shaping or sharing of multiple limited output queue resources on their LAN switches, this is *NOT* the same thing as traffic shaping or long queues on a WAN router port or WAN/METRO switch port. This includes Cisco. This is why Cisco (and Juniper and Foundry, etc.) sell switches with METRO or WAN interfaces on them and why they are more expensive than LAN only switches.

Wan Utillization issue

We are currently experiencing high utillization on our regional WAN connections.
In this scenario, we used to track this situation using IP accounting on the WAN interfaces.
We recently upgraded WAN routers to cisco WS-C6509-E Mutilayer switches.
When we tried to perform IP accounting on these devices, We get a warning <Accounting will exclude mls traffic when mls is enabled>
That way we cannot track the defaulting hosts.
Does anyone have an idea how we can overcome this

Looks like once on board the cat6k ship, you're going to need to switch gear to NetFlow instead:
http://www.ciscosystems.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps700/products_tech_note09186a00800a7af1.shtml#ip_accounting
"IP Accounting excludes MLS traffic
In the Cisco Catalyst 6500 series, Multiple Layer Switching (MLS) is deployed in such a way that once a flow is established, traffic is directly switched at PFC (hardware-switched) and is not processed by the MSFC, hence the lack of continuous accounting. Only new or process-switched flows (software-switched) is recorded by IP accounting when enabled, and even then only until the entry is entered into the database. Thus, the previous warning message is normally displayed when you enable IP accounting on such a platform.
6500(config)#int fa8/40
6500(config-if)#ip accounting
Accounting will exclude mls traffic when mls is enabled.
NetFlow accounting is the preferred method. Refer to Configuring NetFlow for more information regarding to NetFlow."

Airport Extreme Bad Ports (WAN and LAN)

The WAN port and one of the LAN ports on my 4th generation Airport Extreme just died. I've tried a power cycled factory reset and I still can't access it via those two ports. I'm assuming something fried it since my Verizon ONT had to be replaced as well. To insure this doesn't happen in the future I'm considering the purchase of an APC ProtectNet Ethernet surge protector. http://www.apc.com/resource/include/techspec_index.cfm?base_sku=pnet1gb
Does anyone have any expereince with this device? If so, where should I place it? Should it go before the Verizon FIOS ONT or after it?
Also, what can I do with my Airport Extreme? Is it worth repairing or should I just use it to extend my Time Capsule network?
Thanks!

Kelly Crossley wrote:
... Is it common for AE port issues to be intermitent?
No, but an AE that has been damaged by an electrical surge could exhibit the problem you describe. The effects of repeated electrical surges are cumulative, so a subsequent surge could result in a permanent failure. Don't be concerned about it, this is just a fact of life with sensitive electronics.
I had an older Express with lightning damage and it was an ordeal to reset it, but it continues to work to this day. Since then I purchased the ProtectNet. Everything "expensive" is protected with APC UPSs, and that is not limited to computers - these days most consumer electronic equipment is prone to such damage.
I would not be concerned about continuing to use your Extreme. Block off or otherwise label the inoperative port so you don't forget which one it is.
I can't restate it enough - make sure your utilities are properly grounded. I have seen $50,000+ worth of equipment damage due to the lack of a $2.95 ground lug. Next time you have Verizon come out to do anything have their technician verify their system is properly grounded. Insist upon seeing it yourself.

PDASync over wireless LAN or WAN

Hi,
Is it possible to use PDASync over wireless LAN (using 802.11b
card/attachment from Palm or Handspring device) or wireless WAN (CDPD or
CDMA modem)?
I know that currently it is used via the serial port on a Solaris
workstation for sync ... but interested to do the same over a wireless
network ..
Any info will be helpful ...
Thanks,
Sailen
[email protected]

Thanks for the reply.
I think that is the solution I was looking at. I think the WAN-LAN was 192.168.2.1, but I will be setting up a CAT5 from room to room between routers.
Ok. I guess here lies my confusion from what I read, as well as my utter lack of knowledge plaing its part.
If I disconnect the WRT600 from my desktop and hook up the WRT54G (with no other connections to the interenet), how do I set the IP without first resetting the webinterface logon from the WRT600 to the WRT54G. If I just logon as normal, it will be, and is, the WRT600 webinterface with all the WRT600 advanced settings. (I did use the same username for both routers. Could that be the issue?)
Or is my thinking incorrect, which it might be, in that the webinterface login, currently set to the WRT600, and currently displaying all the settings for the WRT600, is supposed to change when I connect the WRT54G. It does not, when logging in as normal.
This is where I think I read about resetting the router preferences to allow for the 'admin' logon to be reset to what would be the WRT54G preferences, which are different, but would allow for changing the DHCP and IP.
Possibly my issue is How. How do I get back to the WRT54G webinterface to make these changes?
If I go to 192.168.1.1, as stated already, it will be the WRT600 logon.
Thanks
ORA

892 Integrated Services WAN Failover

Hi everyone,
I have a client with a Cisco 892 Integrated Services router, and two ISP lines. He would like to implement automatic failover in-case the primary ISP goes down. I lack familiarity with integrated services routers, but will a static default route to the secondary ISP, with a high administrative distance do the trick? It seems to work in packet tracer, but I'm just looking for a second opinion before deploying it in the real world.
Thanks for any feedback.

services aggregation offerings for WAN and MAN that combine with integrated services routers to offer secure, wire-speed delivery of concurrent data, voice, and video services

Save running-config out WAN port?

Hi all. As I look at the thread headings fo rthe other posts I'm struck by how simple my request must seem I hope this is an easy one!
Using 891W routers, I would like to be able to save the running-config out the WAN port (gig0). The most common scenario is that I am SSH'd into a router, but the LAN doesn't have a TFTP server nor is it ideal to put one in there. So I want to save the routers config to myself here somehow
The site that has the rotuer I want to save from is connected via L2L IPSec VPN to head office, and through that tunnel I can ping, RDP, whatever. However, I cannot save the running-config even to a machine on that LAN that has a TFTP server. It just seems TFTP is blocked by default from sending anything out on the WAN port. I've enabled all traffic between these two routers in the ZBFW, but still it doesn't work. I think blocking TFTP from sending out the WAN port might be hard-coded into the IOS or something.
Anybody have thoughts on this? Thank you.

Hi Julio,
Self zones in use are only the OUT-SELF. No SELF-OUT. The L2L VPN works now. The ZBFW setup to allow the VPN to work is one ACL within a 2nd class map inside the OUTSIDE-INSIDE policy map allowing all traffic from one LAN network to the other and this is set on both routers (inversing the network IDs of course). Also to allow the VPN tunnel itself to form, there is an ACL in a 2nd class map on within the OUT-SELF policy map, which allows traffic between the two rouer WAN port IP's (allowing port 500, non500, and all esp).
But what confuses me is this. If I edit that ACL governing the two VPN endpoints, so that instead of just port 500 and such I also say to permit ip any any, I can for example SSH from one router CLI to the other router CLI, whereas without adding this entry to the ACL, I cannot so I know failry surely that this perit ip any any opens any traffic between the two routers.
But this is likely where my lack of understanding of VPN comes in. I imagine I am not actually sending TFTP files through the VPN then...in effect I'm trying to send a TFTP file from one router, to the LAN side of the other router. Perhaps not possible?
I'm actally confusing myself here the more I type. I'll leave this post for now, read Alain's and will reply there.

WAN IP (or lack of)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for