Problem with two lan networks and access to ap

doktornotor

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.

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.

kejianshi

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 (-:

firefox

@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

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.

firefox

@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

kejianshi

"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.

stephenw10

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

kejianshi

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.

firefox

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

stephenw10

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

firefox

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

stephenw10

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

firefox

@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

stephenw10

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

firefox

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

stephenw10

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

kejianshi

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.

firefox

Just now I tried to access a network folder
Using ip number

It work

Why not see all computers when entering the network

kejianshi

File sharing uses broadcasts that don't cross subnets to advertise themselves.

So, when you have files and printers shared, the easy way to reach them across subnets is by IP since no broadcast is required that way.

Understand?

If I had known you had shares, I would have suggested it earlier. Good thing stephenw10 did.

stephenw10

If you have a domain controller/WINS server that can register connected clients then you can span subnets I believe, not my area.

If you have enabled "Register DHCP leases in DNS forwarder" then you can access remote machines by their host name but they still won't be discoverable.

You may be able to get discovery to work across the subnets using the IGMP proxy, I've never tried that.

Steve