Is this possible? Help needed...

|seeyouauntie|

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 27, 2001
Messages
343
Ok guys. Take a look at the diagram and tell me if this is possible.

OfficePCNetwork.jpg


The Cisco router is company configured and although it's here locally with me, I cannot alter it in anyway. I can successfully setup the DI-624 to obtain a WAN IP address from the Cisco and have all the PC's connected to it, both wired & wireless, connect to the internet just fine.

The catch is the one Software Server PC. It has to have its static IP in order to be accessible by outside clients (who are all configured to point towards its 10.100.*.* IP and I can't change that). When it's connected to the DI-624, with it's static IP, is unreachable. I've tried disabling the firewall on the DI-624 but no dice. I'm thinking the WAN on the DI-624 won't forward any traffic to a private IP that's not a 192.168.0.* IP. And I can't change the IP range on the DI-624. It's preset to 192.168.0.*, with the last octet being the only one that's changeable.

All the PC's are running WinXP Pro with SP2 with onboard NIC's.

I hope this makes sense and I'm trying to put it into words the best I can. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks guys...
 
Dynamic IP's on SOHO router gear is basically static. They typically do not change. You can alter the lease or reservation if the router allows it.

If you want to stay with a static IP then just make sure your forwarded correctly on the router to the port your using for your VPN traffic.
 
The proposed visio diagram will not work, as you have both subnets on the lan ports on the dlink router. It could work, however, if you put a switch between the cisco and the dlink router, and put the remaining 10.100.x servers on that switch.
 
Real dumb question...can I assign both the 10.100.*.* & 192.168.0.* to the same subnet, i.e. 255.255.255.128?
 
Real dumb question...can I assign both the 10.100.*.* & 192.168.0.* to the same subnet, i.e. 255.255.255.128?

You are confusing a couple of things here.. There is a difference between subnets and subnet masks. The 10.100.x.x is a different subnet from 192.168.1.x, however, they can (if you want) have the same subnet mask. The subnet mask determines how many hosts you can put on the same logical network. The subnet mask given (255.255.255.128) will give you a total of 128 ip addresses, of which 126 are available.

Now, you can definately put different logical networks on the same physical network, however, you would need a router that knows about each logical network to route between them. Also, the router (yeah, I know there are exceptions...) cannot have multiple interfaces on the same logical network and be expected to perform routing operations.

So, long answer short - you cannot put the servers behind the d-link router, keeping the servers at the 10.100.x network and have them accessible from either the 192.168.1.x network or the 10.100.x network on the wan interface of the d-link.

The easiest way to enable access to these servers from the 10.100.x network would be to put these servers and the wan interface of the d-link router on a switch that is connected to the 10.100.x "cisco" network. Alternatively, if you get a better router than the d-link, one that supports multiple ip addresses on the same physical interface, you could assign a 192.168.1.x ip address to the servers and create a one-to-one nat mapping (with appropriate ruleset) to these servers by assigning multiple 10.100.x ip addresses to the wan interface of the improved router. This will however get a little more trickier...

-andreas
 
You are confusing a couple of things here.. There is a difference between subnets and subnet masks. The 10.100.x.x is a different subnet from 192.168.1.x, however, they can (if you want) have the same subnet mask. The subnet mask determines how many hosts you can put on the same logical network. The subnet mask given (255.255.255.128) will give you a total of 128 ip addresses, of which 126 are available.

Now, you can definately put different logical networks on the same physical network, however, you would need a router that knows about each logical network to route between them. Also, the router (yeah, I know there are exceptions...) cannot have multiple interfaces on the same logical network and be expected to perform routing operations.

So, long answer short - you cannot put the servers behind the d-link router, keeping the servers at the 10.100.x network and have them accessible from either the 192.168.1.x network or the 10.100.x network on the wan interface of the d-link.

The easiest way to enable access to these servers from the 10.100.x network would be to put these servers and the wan interface of the d-link router on a switch that is connected to the 10.100.x "cisco" network. Alternatively, if you get a better router than the d-link, one that supports multiple ip addresses on the same physical interface, you could assign a 192.168.1.x ip address to the servers and create a one-to-one nat mapping (with appropriate ruleset) to these servers by assigning multiple 10.100.x ip addresses to the wan interface of the improved router. This will however get a little more trickier...

-andreas

Ok man, great. Thanks for setting me straight. Basically what it boils down to is me trying to make use of some old gear I've had lying around for a couple years now. I figured if there was a way to make it work, you guys would hook me up ;) I knew the answer was probably going to be to get a better router, but this project doesn't warrant all that. What we've got now in the office is better where we were and that's all that counts.

Props to you guys for helping me out :cool:
 
Back
Top