Static Routing Timeouts

[Connor_15]

Hello,

I have been trying to configure two static routes without success. If anyone is able to help me, it would be incredible.

Right now my network is designed like a tree somewhat. I have:
My ISP's Modem/Router with Static IP's (10.1.10.1) -LAN
One Router Connected to the Modem w/ NAT & DHCP (10.1.10.2) w/ a LAN 192.168.1.x
Another Router connected to the modem w/ NAT & DHCP (10.1.10.3) w/ a LAN 192.168.2.x
This is a sample of one of the routes I have made on the ISP's Router.

Destination IP: 192.168.1.0
Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.0
Gateway IP: 10.1.10.2

Every time I run tracert from any of the servers behind the 192.168.x.x routers I can see that the route is followed to 10.1.10.1 but it continues to timeout after that.

I'd appreciate any help!

 

[getochkn]

Why not turn off DHCP on router 1 and 2 so all IP's will be 10.1.10.x

 

[Connor_15]

Why not turn off DHCP on router 1 and 2 so all IP's will be 10.1.10.x

Ideally, I would like to keep the networks separated. I know this can be done with static routes. The two routers are a Netgear wnr2000 and an Apple Time Capsule. Is there any way these could be blocking the connection?


This is the tracert from a computer behind the 192.168.2.x tracing 192.168.3.x

Tracing route to 192.168.3.1 over a maximum of 30 hops

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms AIRPORT-TIME-CA [192.168.1.1]
2 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 10.1.10.1
3 * * * Request timed out.
4 * * * Request timed out.
5 * * * Request timed out.
6 * * * Request timed out.

 

[jsmithepa]

Rather than having 3 different subnets, can you configure WIFI routers as Access Points? HERE, and have a single subnet, then you wouldn't have to deal with route static or otherwise. One NAT, no multiple NATs.

 

[Connor_15]

Rather than having 3 different subnets, can you configure WIFI routers as Access Points? HERE, and have a single subnet, then you wouldn't have to deal with route static or otherwise. One NAT, no multiple NATs.

Again, I'd rather keep the subnets separate because different servers run behind them.

 

[Shaun o]

Modem router------Static. 10.1.10.1, reserve static ip on router of 10.1.10.2 and 10.1.10.3

Set second router to WAN 10.1.10.2
Reserve Static IP of 10.1.10.3

Set third router Wan to 10.1.10.3

 

[jsmithepa]

Again, I'd rather keep the subnets separate because different servers run behind them.

Except I don't think you have the equipment to pull this off.

Once you static routed your ISP router, ideally this information is propagated to the other routers, if these were enterprise class equipment, but I wager this is not happening.

So on your 168.1 router, there should be an entry that says DEST:192.168.2.0 GATEWAY:10.1.10.3
and on your 168.2 router, there should be an entry that says DEST:192.168.1.0 GATEWAY:10.1.10.2

You can test my theory by manually static route on just one of your PC at either leg. Of course this will work just on THAT PC.

 

[bill001g]

Your whole design is flawed when you are using NAT based routers. The 192.168.x networks do not actually exist to the outside network. Even if router 10.1.10.2 got a packet with a destination address 192.168.1.x it will not send that to the lan. The only address it will accept as a destination ip on the WAN port is the 10.1.10.2 ip address.

The devices you are using are not actually routers they are internet gateway devices. Their purpose is to translate a single lan ip range to a single wan ip.

Now if you had actual routers where you can run without the nat it is trivial to make work.