Question

I'm using the RUT950 with SIM for LTE in Bridge mode. I have changed the address of the RT950 to 192.168.1.201.

I have LAN1 on the RUT950 connected to the WAN IN port of my main router, which is 192.168.1.1, and have a WAN IP from my 4G ISP. So far all is good, main router hands out IP adress's to wired and WiFi devices and they all have internet connection.

I would still like to browse to the RUT950 GUI to monitor stats etc etc, but connecting to 192.168.1.201 with a device connected to my main router is unsuccessful. 

I then connected a cable from LAN2 of RUT950 to LAN2 on my main router, and now I can connect to RUT950 at 192.168.1.201, form any device on the LAN.

This seemed at first to be OK, but I suspect there is some kind of 'looping' effect happening, because the RUT950 LAN1 and LAN2 ports are 'linked'.

What is the correct method when using Bridge or Passthrough to send the WAN out the main router, and still be able to connect to RUT950 GUI. This is not to do with the device I'm trying to connect with not having an IP address, the main router hands out 192.168.1.1/24 address's and the RUT950 GUI is at 192.168.1.201

PS Using latest RUT9XX_R_00.06.00 firmware

Answer 1

Hi,

Using Bridge Mode will disable most of the router's capabilities and you can access your router's settings only through its Static IP address. If you have configured Bridge mode and can no longer reach your router, you'll need to set up a Static IP address on your PC in order to do so. If you would like to reach your router with LTE 4G connection still maintaining the previous setup, I would recommend using "Passthrough" mode. "Passthrough" mode works similar to Bridge mode, except in "Passthrough" mode the router will have an internet connection and be reachable.

Comments

The issue is that in either 'Bridge' or 'Passthrouigh' modes we have to connect RUT LAN port to the 'WAN IN' on the main router, (I use LAN1), so far so good, main router has WAN IP from ISP.

Now we wish to manage the RUT950. The main router DHCP hands out local address's to all devices on the same subnet as the RUT850 and main router, but RUT950 is not accessible. Try this in your lab, the WEB UI is not accessible from the main router. If I connected my PC direct to RUT950 LAN2 port I would be able to connect to WEB UI, but then that PC would not have internet. 

In real situations when using Bridge or Pasthrough we connect our devices to the downstream router and RUT950 is just 'modem', but we still want to manage it.

Now add patch lead from RUT950 LAN2 port to switch on our subnet, we can now ping the RUT950 and manage it with the WEB UI, but there are problems and subnet soon locks up, I think there are conflicts. DHCP is only enabled on the main router but something isn't right and no devices can connect, is this flooding or looping? I don't know but the subnet quickly becomes locked.

I have found a solution using VLAN. I created a new LAN and isolated the LAN1 port. See screenshot. I can now manage the the RUT950 through WEB UI on the newly created 'lan2', and no confilcts. 

LAN1 port still is the WAN out for main router and LAN2 port goes to a switch on downstream subnet and any PC can browse to the WEB UI,  'lan' and 'lan2' are isolated and so there are no conflicts I can also manage WEB UI via WiFi.

This is a permanent solution for me. RUT950 works as modem, downstream main router has WAN IP from ISP and I can now also manage the RUT950 from the downstream subnet without conflicts.

---

Just an after thought.

In a future firmware version could this be achieved automatically? So in Bridge or Passthrough modes we can have a dedicated port for WAN OUT, and use any other port connected to the downstream subnet for WEB UI and management of RUT?

---

I will make a suggestion and hopefully it would be added in the next firmware release.

---

Hello Edward,

is that solution really stable for you? I've tried it, but the WAN port (configured as dhcp) of the firewall (pfSense) which is connected to the RUT950 is sometimes getting the correct IP as bridged from RUT950, which is shortly afterwards replaced with an IP from the lan (where a dhcp server runs), and eventually it shows 'n/a' usually indicating a disabled interface...

Did you set anything else, how do you direct the bridged traffic to the correct vlan?

I tried with firmware RUT9XX_R_00.06.00.4 and RUT9XX_R_00.05.04, RUT9XX_R_00.06.00 is not available for download anymore. The two versions show slightly different behavior, 05.04 as described, with 06.00.4 pfSense never got an IP.

Thanks for any help (and the idea with vlans in first place)!

ps. I'm wondering how bridge mode was supposed to be used if LAN can never be connected (while the bridge is operational)? Home use only??

Answer 2

Bonjour vous ne pouvez pas joindre le rut par le Wan puisqu il est sur le meme reseau 192.168.1.1.

La sortie WAN est routee...donc si votre PC cherche un élément en 192.168.1.1 il va le chercher dans le domaine su broadcast ...donc vous pouvez continuer a utiliser cette methode car comme son nom l indique LAN ET WAN ne sont pas sur les meme meme réseaux...

Comments

Hi Guys

I have the same issue set to bridge or passthrough - the WAN IP address of the UTM it is connected to gets an IP address served through the "management" interface of the RUT...ie from the local LAN... not the telco IP address.

Is there a fix for this other than putting the "management" LAN on a VLAN (with the net effect that the DHCP request is never heard)?

Could we add a firewall rule in the RUT to block port 67 from the LAN port so it could never ask for a DHCP address from the LAN?

David