Problem with two lan networks and access to ap

firefox

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

firefox

Can I assume that the problem
Related to the same reason that you can not access the management interface of the AP

I'm still trying to check why this is happening and fix it
But not urgent
As before

If I run into something on the way so I check and try

At least I have access to shared folders
As you have shown me

stephenw10

It's two distinct problems:

You can't access the wifi router because it's not possible to give it a route back to the LAN side subnet.

You can't see the wifi clients from the wired network because because the protocol Windows uses to discover network shares doesn't span subnets.

I would try adding the route again to the access point. I should do nothing or fix it. The fact that it killed everything last time you tried it implies something wasn't right.

Steve

firefox

@stephenw10:

You can't see the wifi clients from the wired network because because the protocol Windows uses to discover network shares doesn't span subnets.

in My work
There were about 2000 computers connected
Over 50 different networks

I tap the icon "Network" on the computer
I see all the networks
Then click on the network icon
And see all the computers on the network

I guess strains because they are connected to servers
So I guess the server tells computers where they are at,

Is there something similar to pfsense

@stephenw10:

I would try adding the route again to the access point. I should do nothing or fix it. The fact that it killed everything last time you tried it implies something wasn't right.

I prepare a file with all the screenshots of this router
I will attach it to the next post
See what I did there
What should be done

@stephenw10:

You can't see the wifi clients from the wired network because because the protocol Windows uses to discover network shares doesn't span subnets.

I use Linux not Windows

How can you upload here a presentation weighs 2.8 MB
Or upload more images in a single message

firefox

Here is a link to download the pdf file
With a screenshot of the router's management interface

http://www.fileswap.com/dl/R6JzKxPLhV/ap.pdf.html

stephenw10

@firefox:

I guess strains because they are connected to servers
So I guess the server tells computers where they are at.

Exactly.

@firefox:

Is there something similar to pfsense?

No. (I assume you mean for pfSense)

You are probably using the Windows SMB protocol for file shares in Linux, though there are others, so the same applies. You need a domain controller to register the available shares across all subnets and distribute that information. This isn't my forte though. ;)

Here is a useful thread: http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=22064.0

I would try adding the route I described earlier into the AP routing table again. I can't see how it could possibly break anything. It may not work but it should cause any harm.

Steve

firefox

Is the Avahi package can fit

I read in this thread
About a similar problem

http://forum.pfsense.org/index.php?topic=60967.5

When I read the thread you gave a link for it
It said it is related to DNS

stephenw10

Avahi does what you want but only for the mDNS protocol. This is used primarily by Apple but also by various media streamers, NAS boxes etc. Apples Bonjour file sharing service uses it. Reading that wiki page I see that it also supports Linux's nss so you might be able to use that. I've never tried, I would have to do a lot more reading before attempting it! ;)

Steve

kejianshi

You really do not want to rely on broadcasts to keep track of 2000 computers and their shares.

You need to get it mapped by IP and just access shares with IPs.

stephenw10

I think the 2000 machines were just given as an example of how network shares can work perfectly across any number of subnets as long as some central server is tracking and distributing them.
Using Avahi and NSS might be a solution if your network is all Linux/BSD. Interesting prospect.

Steve

kejianshi

SAMBA4 might be something to look at as a stand-alone DC.

https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_AD_DC_HOWTO

stephenw10

Yes that would be the correct way to do it. It does mean you need an always on machine in addition to pfSense.
JimP posted, a long while back now, about trying to make a cut down samba package that only ran as a WINS server. I don't think he could make it work which is a shame since it would fulfill these duties perfectly.

https://forum.pfsense.org/index.php/topic,22561.msg116962.html#msg116962

Steve

kejianshi

I use SAMBA and I have a WINs server set up. To save trouble, I have it running in a VM thats doing a whole lot of other things also.
UBUNTU is really simple to do this with. So is Mint and Centos. Or it would also be simple enough to do it with the LINUX computer he is using as a work station currently. It would be invisible to him once he set up the samba.conf Only thing is, its not going to handle more than just 1 subnet unless he is magician. Thats the part I'm not clear on. How many subnets are there?

(I maintain this, but I don't ACTUALLY need it)