Need some help I’m desperate wireless link routed.

enrique · Wed Jul 26, 2006 5:05 pm

Hello all, I’m trying to deploy a routed wireless link concerning 4 RouterOS units and 802.11a (5 GHz) signal. As you can see on the lines below, I have tried everything and no positive solution comes out. If some one here in the Forum has a clue I will appreciate for life.

Regards,

ether1 192.168.1.200
wlan1 10.0.10.100
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.101
ether1 192.168.2.200
wlan2 10.0.10.102
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.103
ether1 192.168.3.200
wlan2 10.0.10.104
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.105
ether1 192.168.4.200

Alex · Wed Jul 26, 2006 6:55 pm

If second and third routers are repeaters then you can setup wds bridge on them and route subnet /ip route add dst-address=192.168.4.0/24 gateway=10.0.10.105 from first to last router.

tneumann · Wed Jul 26, 2006 7:02 pm

The IP addresses on your wireless links look strange. What netmasks are you using on your interfaces? I suspect the IP addresses on your wireless links might overlap with each other.

And did you check that all required routes are set up in both directions? Are you using a dynamic routing protocol?

--Tom

enrique · Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:08 pm

Thanks for your reply.

the netmasks are 255.255.255.0

tneumann · Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:33 pm

the netmasks are 255.255.255.0

And you have not bridged the wireless interfaces? They're all routed? If so, then the IP addresses of your wireless links do indeed overlap and you should redesign your Layer 3 structure.

--Tom

HarvSki · Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:26 am

Maybe setup the OSPF to automatically take care of the routing and the subnets like this:

ether1 192.168.1.200/24
wlan1 10.0.10.100/32
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.101/32
ether1 192.168.2.200/24
wlan2 10.0.10.102/32
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.103/32
ether1 192.168.3.200/24
wlan2 10.0.10.104/32
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.105/32
ether1 192.168.4.200/24

Set the OSPF routing on each router to:

[admin@WHG] routing ospf> print
               router-id: 0.0.0.0
      distribute-default: never
  redistribute-connected: as-type-2
     redistribute-static: as-type-2
        redistribute-rip: no
        redistribute-bgp: no
          metric-default: 1
        metric-connected: 20
           metric-static: 20
              metric-rip: 20
              metric-bgp: 20

[admin@WHG] routing ospf network> print
Flags: X - disabled, I - invalid 
 #   NETWORK            AREA    
 0   192.168.x.0/24     backbone

where x corresponds to the subnet your are assigning to the ether1 on the router.

tneumann · Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:54 pm

Maybe setup the OSPF to automatically take care of the routing and the subnets like this:
Code: Select all
ether1 192.168.1.200/24
wlan1 10.0.10.100/32
|
|
|
wlan1 10.0.10.101/32

Did you try to run this? I'd be suprised if it worked with those /32 netmasks on both sides of the wireless link. After all, 802.11 is a broadcast medium with ethernet-like layer 2 behaviour, and this implies that the routers on both sides of a wireless link will want to ARP for each others addresses and they'd better be in the same broadcast domain for that to work. Though physically such a link might appear to be point-to-point, in fact from the point of view of the transmission layer it is not. It's just a degenerate case of a broadcast network that happens to have only two nodes on it. This is not PPP over a serial link or something like that...

--Tom

HarvSki · Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:38 am

Hi Tom

Yes it does work, it was something MikroTik showed us at the training in Prague. I do tend to use /29 for point to point most of the time as it can be handy to add another device to the subnet sometimes.

tneumann · Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:49 am

Yes it does work

Ok then, I'm surprised and curious to the point that I have to build such a setup in the lab some day and sniff the wireless link just to see what exactly is going on.

I do tend to use /29 for point to point most of the time as it can be handy to add another device to the subnet sometimes.

Yep, much better, IMHO. Though, if you think about it, just being able to add a third device proves my point that the link is not exactly point-to-point by nature, doesn't it?

--Tom

enrique · Tue Aug 01, 2006 2:15 pm

Thanks a lot guys, I will try your suggestion right now. I will uptade you if this solution works.

But would be better if I put here just a .jpg image so that way you get a nice view.

Regards,

Need some help I’m desperate wireless link routed.

Need some help I’m desperate wireless link routed.

wireless Routed

Who is online