# Seeking Multiple Network Interop Solution.. Running out of ideas



## cyberbubba (Feb 20, 2012)

I had an existing network with a Server 2003, Linksys E1200 router, Broadcom switch and some ubiquiti radios sending out WiFi around the property. The network is 192.168.0.x throughout and all of the XP workstations work perfectly in-house and have access to all services and files on the 2003 Server.to 
Okay, here'e the new setup.
I have installed an entirely new separate network for cameras around the property. In the server room I put another rack mount server running Win 7 Pro, and have added 2 additional servers in two other locations on the property and when connected to a new E1200 router this network is working perfectly. All the cameras and servers are talking to each other without a hiccup. This network is a 192.168.5.x. 
Time to make the two work together, and according to the Cisco support forum these E1200's are supposed to connect to each other without a problem:
Article
Well, when I connect these routers together and follow the Cisco setup neither router will accept a static route, and I have tried my own different setups including RIP on the server which has 2 NICS, but no matter what I do I cannot get these two segments to talk to each other. No internet connectivity on the new network and no recognition from one to the other. I have tried several solutions, and have come up empty. I wanted to post here because I know that a lot of you guys will look at this and have the answer. I have been fighting this for three days and my head is about to explode, and I can't even focus on the problem any more. Suggestions, ideas, all are welcomed. Thanks in advance!


----------



## Wand3r3r (Sep 17, 2010)

why did you add a router when a switch was all you needed?

How did you connect the two routers together? router1 lan port to router2 wan port?

You follow the article completely? It looks correct.


----------



## cyberbubba (Feb 20, 2012)

I added the router because they are different network segments 192.168.0.x and 192.168.5.x and I did use the WAN port on the new router going to a LAN port on the existing router. The new router can obtain an IP address from the old one 192.168.0.x for the WAN setup, but the new router will not accept any static routes at all per the Cisco article for setup.

How could I get these two networks to see each other just using the switch without running RIP on the Server? Any help would be a HUGE help here.


----------



## Wand3r3r (Sep 17, 2010)

let me rephrase the question: why did you want to subnets when you could have just used one?

did you notice this in the article?
"NOTE: This option is not available if NAT is Enabled or if Operating Mode is Gateway."

You would be doing NAT with those ips which would explain why you don't have the option.

You could try doing a route add at the pc

route -p ADD 192.168.5.0 MASK 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.0
from here
Adding a TCP/IP Route to the Windows Routing Table - How-To Geek

modify the ips accordingly


----------



## cyberbubba (Feb 20, 2012)

I could have explained the enterprise better.
The existing network has multiple clients that use the file server and share printers, etc. 
It is all on the 192.168.0.1 router, and there are also multiple ubiquiti radios and bullets on this network providing WiFi over several acres.
When I started the new camera network I deployed three servers, one at the main office and two remotely that all come back to the 192.168.5.1 router. They all work perfectly, and I am using EnGenius wireless devices on this network to bring those remote servers back up to the main office without a hitch. There could be as many as 36 cameras on each server over time with their own .5 IP address, and with that being said the IP shortage was one consideration, and being able to isolate the other network were major considerations in having another network segment. It would be so simple if I could put everything on the .0, but it is not practical.
So, back to my problem, I really need these two segments to communicate in both directions and in response to your post, NAT is was turned off on the .5 and it was not operating as a Gateway.
I am open to any and all ideas, including going a new direction. I am desperate for ideas, so any help will be very appreciated. Thank you!


----------



## Wand3r3r (Sep 17, 2010)

"NAT is was turned off on the .5 and it was not operating as a Gateway"
Were you able to add the route as desired?

" 36 cameras on each server over time with their own .5 IP address, and with that being said the IP shortage "

Need more than 254 ips? Then use a class b address range [65k hosts]

"being able to isolate the other network were major considerations in having another network segment."

Layer 3 switch with vlans would have accomplished that easier than a router with more control.

Appears your only choice at this point is to get the 2nd router working with the route add per the article


----------



## cyberbubba (Feb 20, 2012)

Okay, I have another idea .....
I am on a .248 network, and I have 4 more static IP's remaining, so how about if I take router # 2 and set it up with a static WAN address, and then use the 192.168.5.x network on that router. Now it look like this:
THE ORIGINAL BUSINESS NETWORK
router 1 WAN
209.173.52.50
Subnet mask = 255.255.255.248
Gateway = 209.173.52.49
Primary DNS = 209.183.36.11
Secondary DNS = 209.183.45.11
3rd DNS = 8.8.8.8
LAN
192.168.0.1
255.255.255.0
SERVER #0 192.168.0.200 (Windows 2003 SP3) 
Running Exchange, Active Directory, IIS

Router 2 WAN
209.173.52.51
Subnet mask = 255.255.255.248
Gateway = 209.173.52.49
Primary DNS = 209.183.36.11
Secondary DNS = 209.183.45.11
3rd DNS = 8.8.8.8
LAN
192.168.5.1
255.255.255.0
SERVER #1 192.168.5.50 (Windows 7 Professional)
SERVER #2 192.168.5.51 (Windows 7 Professional)
SERVER #3 192.168.5.52 (Windows 7 Professional)
These 3 servers are only running GeoVision Camera Software

The only other pieces of the network are two separate wireless networks serving two purposes. I have Ubiquiti Bullets on the same switch as both routers and server that provides WiFi throughout the property. 
Here is one segment:
This bullet transmits to location #1
Bullet2 in Bridge Mode
Static IP: 192.168.0.211
IP Address: IP: 192.168.0.211	Auto IP Aliasing:ON	
Netmask: 255.255.255.0	IP Aliases:	
Gateway IP: 192.168.0.1
Primary DNS IP: 192.168.0.200
Secondary DNS IP: 8.8.8.8
Wireless Mode: Access Point WDS
LAN IP Address: 192.168.0.211
WLAN IP Address: 192.168.0.211
THIS BULLET GOES INTO A HUB TO ANOTHER BULLET2HP ON A TOWER WITH OMNI-DIRECTIONAL ANTENNAE 
That operates in Router Mode and does DHCP for a 192.168.1.1 Network providing WiFi to everyone within range

I have another EnGenius Wireless network that bridges the connections from Server #2 and #3 back up to the switch where Server #1 and ROuter # 2 reside.

So, I have two totally separate networks coming back to two separate switches that can talk to all the points within their respective networks.

Now I am back to the initial dilemma. I need to provide Internet access the new camera network (192.168.5.1) and also get that network to have two way communications with the original network (192.168.0.1).

If I bring a cable from the original switch to the new switch I should be able to accomplish internet access for the .5 network, but how can I bridge the .5 and .0 so that can communicate?

My brain is fried, I have looked at this in so many different ways now that nothing makes sense any more. HELP SOMEONE??


----------



## Wand3r3r (Sep 17, 2010)

If the routers support site to site vpn you could connect the two networks via the wan that way.

Otherwise you are still in the same boat of you need a router between the two lan segments so you can route between .0 and .5

A vlan switch and the same subnet would have been a elegant solution for your situation.

Why are you not able to complete the route add per the article?


----------

