Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Problem with two lan networks and access to ap

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General pfSense Questions
    100 Posts 5 Posters 30.2k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • F
      firefox
      last edited by

      @doktornotor:

      @firefox:

      Selecting other options
      And there is no communication

      Huh, whut?

      If I choose another option
      I will not have internet access

      @firefox:

      As soon as I turn off the dhcp
      And gave him a fixed network address
      the LAN netmask
      and LAN gateway
      are from the pfsense

      Eh? There is no netmask and gateway visible anywhere…

      there is on pfsense

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • stephenw10S
        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
        last edited by

        @firefox:

        ping from pfsense 192.168.0.1 to AP 192.168.2.1 There is Ping

        ping from AP 192.168.2.1 to pfsense 192.168.0.1 no ping

        I assume this must be a typo and the ping was to the AP at 192.168.2.101?

        You need to try pinging from the AP to the pfSense OPT1 address, 192.168.2.1. That should work fine.

        @firefox:

        from pfsense to wireless client - no ping

        That's odd. The problems with the AP should not cause this. Presumably AP to wireless client is OK?

        Steve

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • stephenw10S
          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
          last edited by

          Reading the manual for that router (wbr-3406tx) it appears there's no way to set a subnet mask or gateway for the LAN interface but it's not a problem because you can add a route manually. Adding a route is the correct way to do this, fudging the subnet is a workaround.

          In Advanced Setting: Routing: add this:

          Destination: 192.168.0.1
          Subnet mask: 255.255.255.0
          Gateway: 192.168.2.1
          Hop: 1

          Enable that and hit save. Your AP will now have a route back to the pfSense LAN subnet.

          Steve

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • D
            doktornotor Banned
            last edited by

            @firefox:

            If I choose another option
            I will not have internet access

            The only correct option is Disable/None/whatever matching this… Not any random other option.

            @firefox:

            there is on pfsense

            That is NOT what we are talking about at all. We are talking about netmask/GW on the AP. And on that note, there should be no gateway set for LAN interfaces on pfSense!

            @stephenw10:

            Reading the manual for that router (wbr-3406tx) it appears there's no way to set a subnet mask or gateway for the LAN interface but it's not a problem because you can add a route manually

            Apparently this piece of garbage HW would best be utilized in a dumpster.

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • K
              kejianshi
              last edited by

              I'm withholding judgement on the usefullness of this device as an AP until stephenw10 suggestion is tried.

              Even if the router/AP doesn't end up being as slick as some other APs, I do see some usefullnes in it.
              It is currently isolated from the LAN, so for sharing internet to visitors, it might be cool and secure (-:

              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • F
                firefox
                last edited by

                @stephenw10:

                @firefox:

                ping from pfsense 192.168.0.1 to AP 192.168.2.1 There is Ping

                ping from AP 192.168.2.1 to pfsense 192.168.0.1 no ping

                I assume this must be a typo and the ping was to the AP at 192.168.2.101?

                You need to try pinging from the AP to the pfSense OPT1 address, 192.168.2.1. That should work fine.

                @firefox:

                from pfsense to wireless client - no ping

                That's odd. The problems with the AP should not cause this. Presumably AP to wireless client is OK?

                Steve

                it is a typo my bad

                i try ping from 192.168.2.101 to 192.168.2.1 and there is a ping

                @stephenw10:

                Reading the manual for that router (wbr-3406tx) it appears there's no way to set a subnet mask or gateway for the LAN interface but it's not a problem because you can add a route manually. Adding a route is the correct way to do this, fudging the subnet is a workaround.

                In Advanced Setting: Routing: add this:

                Destination: 192.168.0.1
                Subnet mask: 255.255.255.0
                Gateway: 192.168.2.1
                Hop: 1

                Enable that and hit save. Your AP will now have a route back to the pfSense LAN subnet.

                Steve

                I tried to change and nothing worked
                I had to do hard Reset
                And configure it as before

                @doktornotor:

                @firefox:

                If I choose another option
                I will not have internet access

                The only correct option is Disable/None/whatever matching this… Not any random other option.

                @firefox:

                there is on pfsense

                That is NOT what we are talking about at all. We are talking about netmask/GW on the AP. And on that note, there should be no gateway set for LAN interfaces on pfSense!

                @stephenw10:

                Reading the manual for that router (wbr-3406tx) it appears there's no way to set a subnet mask or gateway for the LAN interface but it's not a problem because you can add a route manually

                Apparently this piece of garbage HW would best be utilized in a dumpster.

                There is no option disable

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • K
                  kejianshi
                  last edited by

                  Getting a E1000 linksys is crazy cheap on ebay.

                  When loaded with DD-WRT they will do every thing you want and more, just incase this doesn't pan out for you.

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • F
                    firefox
                    last edited by

                    @kejianshi:

                    Getting a E1000 linksys is crazy cheap on ebay.

                    When loaded with DD-WRT they will do every thing you want and more, just incase this doesn't pan out for you.

                    My cousin did not need it
                    So brought it to me

                    If I had to buy
                    Would you buy something much better

                    On that note
                    I'm dead tired
                    I will continue with this tomorrow

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • K
                      kejianshi
                      last edited by

                      "If I had to buy
                      Would you buy something much better"

                      For your purposes, its hard to do much better - Easy to spend much more money though.
                      If I wanted wireless N vs G, I'd go with the E2000 - Also dirt cheap used.

                      A new solution will probably not bring you any more practical utility and will cost you.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • stephenw10S
                        stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                        last edited by

                        Hmm, this is interesting but confusing.

                        It is possible that it's only possible to add static routes on the WAN interface, there is no option to select the interface. However if that were the case then adding that route should have had no effect at all. I assume by your statement "nothing worked" that you were then unable to connect to the webgui at all? Seems like your router may be misbehaving somehow.

                        Anyway you have yet more options! Another way to allow the access point to have a route back to LAN is to NAT between them. Now usually you wouldn't want that but it could be done with manual NAT configuation.

                        The other thing you could do, and this is what I've done, is just not worry about it!  ;) I have an access point that (mis)behaves in exactly this way. It has no route back to other interfaces, I cannot add a route to it, I cannot configure a gateway on it's LAN, I can enter a fudged subnet mask but that doesn't work. So I set it up and ignore it. I probably haven't needed to check its webgui for a year or so and when I do I just connect by wifi.

                        Steve

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • K
                          kejianshi
                          last edited by

                          Personally, I think he should have all his connections on the LAN ports on that AP and that he should put tape over his WAN port.

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • F
                            firefox
                            last edited by

                            Good Morning

                            I did a Hard Reset to AP
                            And put everything to the initial state as if he were Router

                            Then again I followed the guide to make it to AP
                            And it works as AP
                            Just the access its management interface is only when connecting Directly to him
                            wired or wireless

                            I do not know what to say
                            I tried everything I know
                            And all you know

                            Just does not work
                            I will stay with it how it is now
                            There is internet access from wireless devices

                            But not sharing files between computers on the wired network
                            To computers on the wireless network
                            Or reversed

                            It would make me crazy in the near future
                            So many thanks to everyone for the help

                            If I find why this happens I promise to update

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • stephenw10S
                              stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                              last edited by

                              Just because you can't access the AP webgui from the wired network that should not mean you can't access other wireless clients. That is some other issue. As long as you have the correct firewall rules in place in pfSense there should be access between the wired and wireless networks.

                              Steve

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • F
                                firefox
                                last edited by

                                Unfortunately it also does not work
                                We have 5 laptops at home
                                One currently running and is with me
                                Has two shared folders

                                They are accessible only if the computer is connected to the wired network

                                Of course the same thing
                                But the reverse

                                No wireless devices access to the wired network shared directories

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • stephenw10S
                                  stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                  last edited by

                                  Ok, a number of things could be happening here:
                                  pfSense is blocking the traffic. That's easy to check because it will appear in the firewall logs.
                                  There's a routing problem. This doesn't appear anywhere so it's harder to spot but we've just spent a good deal of time checking out the routing on your network and it looks good.
                                  Something is blocking the traffic locally. E.g. Windows firewall is blocking access because the traffic is coming from another subnet.

                                  Remind me, you are not able to ping between wired and wireless clients either?

                                  Steve

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • F
                                    firefox
                                    last edited by

                                    @stephenw10:

                                    Remind me, you are not able to ping between wired and wireless clients either?

                                    Steve

                                    Yes

                                    Specific computers that I am trying to access shared folders
                                    Are running Linux Ubuntu

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • stephenw10S
                                      stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                      last edited by

                                      Ah, er, yes you're not able to ping or yes you are able to ping?  ;)

                                      If you plug a client into one of the other LAN ports on the wbr-3406 can you ping the wired clients (on 192.168.0.X) from there? That should exclude and wifi weirdness from the problem.

                                      Steve

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • F
                                        firefox
                                        last edited by

                                        Yes there is ping

                                        from wireless computer 192.168.2.8 to wired computer 192.168.0.2
                                        and
                                        from wired computer 192.168.0.2 to wireless computer 192.168.2.8

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • stephenw10S
                                          stephenw10 Netgate Administrator
                                          last edited by

                                          Ok so you can ping but not do file transfer? And this worked ok before?

                                          This is probably because the machines are not on the same subnet so they are not directly discoverable by Windows (or whatever). Have you tried accessing the shared folder directly by its IP?

                                          Steve

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • K
                                            kejianshi
                                            last edited by

                                            If you don't know how to access a share by IP, its easy in windows…

                                            hit start > computer

                                            on left side, click network

                                            select your current computer in the list

                                            now in that bar at top of file browser, put in \192.168.1.30  (or whatever the IP of the computer with the share is)

                                            I'm slipping - I should have suggested this way way back but "shares" was never mentioned early on.

                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.