Superhub : Superhub & Portforwarding ?

[ferretuk]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Your plan is sound. The main thing is to give the SH the minimum amount to do by turning off wireless & firewall. This leaves it mereley to route out to its four switch ports.

You'll want to allow for double natting if your devices are sensistive to this; you'll need to set each router into bridge mode with own discrete DHCP range for serving out to their attached devices. Double natting takes care of addressing from the SH to the appropriate router.

There is no reason I can think of why the solution you propose shouldn't work with stability.

If all the routers (other than the SH) are in bridge mode this will work (assuming the DHCP servers only serve to their LAN side connections when in bridge mode?) but with the following caveats:

1. DDNS updating may well not work as the router given the task of running the update will have a private IP address on its WAN port, not the VM public address.
2. Machine IP addresses will change as you move between segments.

Far easier, IMHO, to simply use the downstream routers as access points...

EDIT

Looking at a Cisco document, their implementation of 'bridge' mode completely disables all router functionality, including DHCP, and turns the unit into an access point anyway...

---------- Post added at 12:57 ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 ----------

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

It will, it's just not ideal.

Accessing the printers and the NAS that are connected to the SH from the LAN side of the downstream router will be problematic and speed limited! 'Discovery' software won't work for printer installation (if required). Static IPs will need to be configured on the SH connected devices (not necessarily a bad thing of course!) and this isn't mentioned by GM...

"Not ideal" is a bit of understatement! It's a dog's dinner

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

NAT, yes. Routing, no. Multiple routers is fine, that's how the whole internet works.

The routers under discussion are, by default, NAT devices.

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Don't need to be anywhere near the same subnet.

Makes management of them a bit more awkward if they're not? No reason not to be on the same subnet so why make life difficult?

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Or you could run a DDNS update client on a second router, like was already suggested

The WAN address of the second router will be the private address allocated by the SH so that's likely to be the address used for DDNS update. PC clients are 'NAT aware' and will identify the public address when behind a NAT router but do router clients work in the same way? I haven't tested this (have you?) but it would seem unlikely...

[General Maximus]

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Unfortunately the solution proposed by GM won't actually work...

Yes it will. The only booboo i made suggesting you put the shub in modem mode and then use it as a switch. I'll correct myself: as we dont want to use the shub as either a router or wireless ap ditch it all together and get a gigabit switch

[ferretuk]

Originally Posted by General Maximus

Yes it will. The only booboo i made suggesting you put the shub in modem mode and then use it as a switch. I'll correct myself: as we dont want to use the shub as either a router or wireless ap ditch it all together and get a gigabit switch

Ah, the missing link! You didn't mention modem mode so you'll forgive the innocent reader for assuming you were (as was the OP) talking about router mode. All your advice to turn off SH DHCP and wireless (which you can only do in router mode) duly ignored

[robinhood1701]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Your plan is sound. The main thing is to give the SH the minimum amount to do by turning off wireless & firewall. This leaves it mereley to route out to its four switch ports.

You'll want to allow for double natting if your devices are sensistive to this; you'll need to set each router into bridge mode with own discrete DHCP range for serving out to their attached devices. Double natting takes care of addressing from the SH to the appropriate router.

There is no reason I can think of why the solution you propose shouldn't work with stability.

Seph, get your first paragraph, Shub's don't have a good reputation, the extra ports could free up my five port switch,

Agree with your second paragraph, but....

Double Natting ??

Networking just gets harder !

Could anyone point towards a idiot guide for me pls ?

[ferretuk]

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Accessing the printers and the NAS that are connected to the SH from the LAN side of the downstream router will be problematic and speed limited! 'Discovery' software won't work for printer installation (if required).

Correction to my own post - Accessing the printers and NAS won't work...

To the OP:

If using the SH ethernet ports is important then you'll have to use it as a router and my advice in post 12 stands. However if these ports don't need to be used then continue using the E6500 as your router (SH in modem mode) and use the other routers as access points. I'm confused at this point though as isn't that what you're doing anyway?

Back to the iPhone issue - If you want to be able to access machines (plural) on your LAN you're into the realms of setting up a VPN server in your LAN (and client on the iPhone) rather than port forwarding...

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by ferretuk

1. DDNS updating may well not work as the router given the task of running the update will have a private IP address on its WAN port, not the VM public address.

It'll work just fine. Before people had DDNS clients in their routers they were running on PCs with private IP addresses. The update server sees the public IP as the source of the connection whenever the client tries to update anyway.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Machine IP addresses will change as you move between segments.

Not necessarily. I don't see why they would. You would only have one subnet and one IP range.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Far easier, IMHO, to simply use the downstream routers as access points...

Easier, if you don't need to magic up an extra 4 ports and additional cable out of thin air...

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Looking at a Cisco document, their implementation of 'bridge' mode completely disables all router functionality, including DHCP, and turns the unit into an access point anyway...

That's basically what an AP is... a bridge.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Accessing the printers and the NAS that are connected to the SH from the LAN side of the downstream router will be problematic and speed limited!

I don't see why it would. It should go at full switch speed, i.e. gigabit.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

'Discovery' software won't work for printer installation (if required).

Should work just fine. When set up correctly you will still only have one subnet and one ethernet domain.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Static IPs will need to be configured on the SH connected devices (not necessarily a bad thing of course!) and this isn't mentioned by GM...

Should work just fine without. The second router dishing out DHCP addresses will dish out DHCP addresses.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

"Not ideal" is a bit of understatement! It's a dog's dinner

Again, the majority of corporate LANs and the internet at large works on this sort of setup, it's not ideal only in it's hard to set up properly.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

The routers under discussion are, by default, NAT devices.

Unless you turn NAT off. NAT is an optional feature and present on just about any router.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Makes management of them a bit more awkward if they're not? No reason not to be on the same subnet so why make life difficult?

I don't get your point. My proposal *is* to put them all on the same subnet.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

The WAN address of the second router will be the private address allocated by the SH so that's likely to be the address used for DDNS update.

Or, it'll use the public address like it should do.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

PC clients are 'NAT aware' and will identify the public address when behind a NAT router but do router clients work in the same way?

Yes.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

I haven't tested this (have you?)

Yes.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

but it would seem unlikely...

Works just fine. On Openwrt especially, you can set it to use any IP and fetch it via any mechanism. Either the server can use the IP it sees the connection coming from, or the router can go to www.whatismyip.com and submit the IP it gets from there.

---------- Post added at 17:14 ---------- Previous post was at 17:13 ----------

Originally Posted by General Maximus

Yes it will. The only booboo i made suggesting you put the shub in modem mode and then use it as a switch. I'll correct myself: as we dont want to use the shub as either a router or wireless ap ditch it all together and get a gigabit switch

The problem would be, obviously, you would need an extra switch and an extra cable running across the house. Which can be avoided with some clever setup.

---------- Post added at 17:17 ---------- Previous post was at 17:14 ----------

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Correction to my own post - Accessing the printers and NAS won't work...

Should work just fine. You will still have one continuous ethernet broadcast domain.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

To the OP:

If using the SH ethernet ports is important then you'll have to use it as a router and my advice in post 12 stands.

Probably the easiest option tbh.

Originally Posted by ferretuk

Back to the iPhone issue - If you want to be able to access machines (plural) on your LAN you're into the realms of setting up a VPN server in your LAN (and client on the iPhone) rather than port forwarding...

Not sure why you would need a VPN. Port forwarding works in all circumstances and most mobile clients use it as their primary/default access mechanism.

[ferretuk]

You'd have saved a lot of typing if you'd re-read the posts I was replying to again rather than posting out of context one liners...

[qasdfdsaq]

Except this forum strips quotes from quotes...

[Eeeps]

For the benefit of the OP, there are a number of key concepts that need to be understood.

1. Ethernet Switching
2. IP Routing
3. Network Address Translation
4. Dynamic Host Configuration
5. Name Resolution

All of these are required in your setup to enable the devices you have on your home network to communicate with each other and with the wider Internet.

The physical devices you have may include more than one of these functions.

e.g The SHub includes IP routing, Ethernet switching, NAT and DHCP in router mode.

I suggest you think simple when setting up you home network. Don't use multiple subnets and use static IP addresses for devices that provide 'server' functionality.

You should only have one device with router and NAT functionality that provides the interface between your local subnet and the Internet.

If real speed is required on intenal links use one core ethernet switch with multiple intefaces and avoid uplinks between switches.

[robinhood1701]

OK chaps, thanks for all this lively discussion, but this OP is a bit of a noob, who is getting a little confused (??)

So we're all agreed, you cannot successfully put the shub in router mode and disable the other stuff, AND have another router next downline on the same network doing all the router stuff,

What does everyone think is the best solution, after this discussion ?

[ferretuk]

Originally Posted by robinhood1701

OK chaps, thanks for all this lively discussion, but this OP is a bit of a noob, who is getting a little confused (??)

So we're all agreed, you cannot successfully put the shub in router mode and disable the other stuff, AND have another router next downline on the same network doing all the router stuff,

What does everyone think is the best solution, after this discussion ?

As I've said before, all hangs on whether you *need* to use the SH LAN ports for your printer and NAS?

Best to use the SH in modem mode, the E6500 as your router and the other routers as access points (bridge mode or connected LAN to LAN) at various points around your house but then you can't connect the printer and NAS to the SH...

This still doesn't address your iPhone app but you haven't really described what you're trying to do with it.

[Sephiroth]

Yep - Modem Mode. The principal advantage is that you'll be free of the SH's crapismos, both present and future with rock solid behaviour.

Then have access points as the Ferret says.

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by robinhood1701

So we're all agreed, you cannot successfully put the shub in router mode and disable the other stuff, AND have another router next downline on the same network doing all the router stuff

No I quite clearly said you can, and that's how the whole internet works.

What does everyone think is the best solution, after this discussion ?

If you need the ports on the Superhub, use them. If you can get a second switch and cable and run it from your own router back to the Superhub then even better.

[robinhood1701]

Hi Guys,
Hope everyone had a good christmas,
Ok, story so far, in my original post i was trying to find out about port forwarding and DDNS to try to access my home network remotely with my iPhone 5.

The only remote app i've got working ok is the Synology native app into my DS212j NAS box, n that's not brilliant, compared to a Cloud app like Dropbox which connects nearly instantly on a good 3G signal.

Put the shub back into router this morning to get Virgin to check out the speed we are getting, if your using another router, they will not help untill the shub is modem, we use most stuff on wireless, three laptops & four iPhones, not been showing good speeds on the speedtest app on my iPhone, Virgin said, try the laptop wired, 62mbps !

So that's sorted, left shub in router, and switched EA6500 back on, also still in router, works OK, trying on both laptop and iPhone,

Next trusty old Cisco E4200 V1 in wired bridge mode back, tested, OK,
one little prob there, connects ok on 2.4ghz but not 5GHZ, is 5ghz disabled in bridge mode ?

Next, Edimax repeater in wired bridge mode, fine.

It all seems stable at mo, will give it time n see how it goes, then prob start switching stuff off on shub n see how that goes.

What i'm thinking now is, Cisco EA6500 is a new router, with not the usual local accessed router page, but it uses CiscoCloudConnect which you need a working internet connection, with no local backup option, which is abit bad really if your internet connection goes down,
People have had a few probs with this service, usually after firmware updates, which have been about two or three, check out this post -
http://homecommunity.cisco.com/t5/Wi...542800/page/29

If my system maintains stability, i may put the E4200 back into router, put the EA6500 into bridge whilst Cisco are maturing the firmware, to use for a good wifi signal in the lounge where we access the internet alot, it'll look ok next to the Tv because of its low, no external aerial design, we already have a ethernet cable into the TiVo box, so i'll plug the EA6500 into that, shorter cable into TiVo, so it'll give two ethernet ports plus two USB ports easily accessible.
I don't desperately need the shub's LAN ports, but if the shub can be used like this to an advantage, thats ok with me,
hope you guys stick around on this, just in case something goes wrong ?

Whilst on the chat to Virgin, they tried to sell me their Security Software n tech help service for £10 a month, is it any good ?

[ferretuk]

Originally Posted by robinhood1701

So we're all agreed, you cannot successfully put the shub in router mode and disable the other stuff, AND have another router next downline on the same network doing all the router stuff

Originally Posted by robinhood1701

So that's sorted, left shub in router, and switched EA6500 back on, also still in router, works OK, trying on both laptop and iPhone,

I don't desperately need the shub's LAN ports, but if the shub can be used like this to an advantage, thats ok with me,

Not sure why you've left the SH in router mode? It's been explained that you only need to do this if you must use the SH LAN ports. If you don't *need* to use them then modem mode is a much better solution...