[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: ip masquerading/subnets



Craig White wrote:
> box 2 and 3 should be on same subnet as box 1 ( 192.168.1.0/24 ) because
> wireless access point is not the same thing as a router.
> 
> Craig
> 
It looks to me like he is trying to use the Linux box as a wireless
bridge, but is trying to do it without bridging. It can be done, but
only if you give every box on the 192.168.1.0/24 network a path to
the 192.168.2.0/24 that uses the Linux box as a gateway, or if you
can configure the D-link router to add a static route to the
192.168.2.0/24 network using 192.168.1.5 as the gateway. (I have not
read the manual on this router, so I do not know if that is possible.)

Even though it is a little harder to set up, in the long run
bridging eth0 and ath0 on the Linux box, and having everything on
the 192.168.1.0/24 network would be my choice.

Mikkel
-- 

  Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons,
for thou art crunchy and taste good with Ketchup!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]