Port forwarding problem - x.x.2.1 to x.x.3.1

By Camputer ·
I have come across a problematic situation and am hoping some of you will have dealt with something like this before. I'll do my best to explain.
Modem receives the cable signal.

Router 1 (WRT54G @ receives the signal, giving local pc's access, as well as an AirBridge unit, which broadcasts the signal across a nearby area.

Air Bridge Receiver receives that signal at the remote location.

Router 2 (WRT600N @ receives the signal from the Air Bridge receiver, giving local PC's internet access.
I need my customer to be able to connect remotely to his PC's at the second location. These pc's are at 192.168.3.x .

Of course the first Linksys router (the gateway) only lets you forward ports to it's own range at 192.168.2.x, and not to 192.168.3.x .

If anyone could suggest something, or tell me how I can get this done, I would greatly appreciate it!


This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Answers

Collapse -

You may be able to

by IC-IT In reply to Port forwarding problem - ...

setup advanced routing depending on the router's version.
Check your user manual ( CD or download the pdf from Linksys support) for advanced routing.
I know that from at least version 6 onward you can set routing tables to other networks.

Collapse -

I'm with bwilmot setup a static route

by CG IT In reply to You may be able to

you a static route from router A to router B for remote access traffic.

Collapse -

Will give it a try

by Camputer In reply to You may be able to

Thanks guys, I'll give that a try and report back. I appreciate the help.

Collapse -


by Camputer In reply to You may be able to

I've been messing around with the settings, but hit one problem: how to get the incoming remote desktop request forwarded to this different IP range. The gateway Linksys router is at and the secondary Linksys router is at, and I can't seem to figure out how to get those remote desktops forwarded to the 3.1 router. Any ideas? Or maybe I'm missing something obvious?

Collapse -

In the advanced routing screen

by IC-IT In reply to Hmm...

Set a static route to the other network.
The second network should be
This has to be done on the 3.1 router. If it still wants to fail do it on the 2.1 advanced routing table the oppisite way i.e.
Make sure that it also reflects the other network as being on the wireless network. Then use show route and save the changes.

Collapse -

Thanks bwilmot

by Camputer In reply to In the advanced routing s ...

I will continue to work on this and it seems this is the answer I was looking for. Thanks for the help!

Collapse -

Reserving an IP address for customers to access

by di9fftr731 In reply to Thanks bwilmot

Have you considered static?

The WRT600N in particular has a fantastic side-benefit; in the Status tab, it'll automatically gather your DNS servers (#'s 1-3,) avoiding that call to your ISP.

You can much more easily manipulate your ports if you're static and work with your customers in the streaming downloads arena.

Good luck!

Collapse -

If I understand correctly

by oldbaritone In reply to Port forwarding problem - ...

the 2.x router is the "main" net, and it's connected to the 3.x router via the AirBridge.
Then does the AirBridge actually have two 2.x addresses, "Near" end and "Far" end, or is it transparent? Look at the WAN side of the 3.x router. If I got this backwards, look at the other router. One or the other will have a WAN address of 192.168.(2 or 3).x

Bottom line, look at the WAN connection of the 3.x router - does it have a 2.x address on the WAN side and a 3.X address on the LAN side? If so, set up port forwarding in the 3.x router to the PC's that need to be controlled, and connect to the 2.x WAN address of that router.

Or the easy-way-out would be to use a commercial product like "GoToMyPC" and then the vendor will handle all of the details. On the down side, the commercial solution would make the PC's able to be controlled from anywhere if one has the sign-on information, but that might be an advantage to the customer, too. It depends on what they really want. And of course, the commercial solution would have monthly fees.

Collapse -

Dude the question is almost a year and a half old

by CG IT In reply to If I understand correctly

don't be like those guys who spend their time dredging up 2 and 3 year old posts which the original poster probably forgot about 2 and 3 years ago and most likely could care less about let alone come back 2 and 3 years later and give out a thumb.

Related Discussions

Related Forums