Let me try to explain as the subject probably isn’t clear. I have two networks between two houses. I have a pair of SXTs being used to connect the two houses (not for ISP use) just to connect the two networks from a LAN perspective really. Here is a diagram to better explain as this will answer a lot of questions on how its setup.
Right now I use Asus Routers at each location to have a static route to point to each other. Example is on 2744 side I have a static route set to the following “Destination 192.168.0.0, Subnet 255.255.255.0, Gateway 192.168.2.50”. So if anything on the 2744 side wants to get to the 192.168.0.x side, the 2744 Asus knows to fwd it to the SXT which has a bridge network setup. Really the same route on the 1750 side, except obviously Destination is different and Gateway is different. Again everything works fine.
What my intent is to essentially remove the Asus Routers, mainly because the Uverse Gigabit comes with a Gateway unit, however that gateway unit doesn’t allow for any static routes. However its a fairly decent unit having 4x4 on the 5ghz side and 2x2 on the 2ghz side and one less unit in front of the LAN. And allows me to eliminate the Asus being on the DMZ plus of the Uverse Gateway. But what I need is the ability for a static route. I noticed the Mikrotik SXT has static route function when using Winbox, but never could get it to work when I tried this the other day. I created a route like mentioned above, but the traffic would not go to the other side.
Is there any way to make this work without the Asus device and a static route on the Asus? Or will I basically need to get a 16port switch maybe that is also layer3 based.
The reason this isn’t working for you is that if you remove the Asus routers, your packets from your devices are getting routed directly to the ATT Uverse (the default gateway for your computers), and if it can’t do static routes, then it is not helpful. You do need some kind of router in there that can handle static routes, so it is not feasible to remove the Asus without replacing it with a similar unit.
Correct, but from your post, it also sounds like you want to use the wireless on the ATT Uverse. Any devices connected wirelessly to the Uverse would not pass through a layer 3 switch and therefore would not be able to connect to the other house. Unless your devices on wireless do not need to be able to connect to the other house?
Ok Im following you a bit more now. So wireless off the UVerse gateway would not know where to go. So that may not be an option (unless I lead the Asus there and turn it into an AP only mode (like my other devices in the house).
Ok but to be clear, if I didn’t use the UVerse as a wireless client (and just as the gateway device), would my current 16port switch suffice or I still need a layer3 based switch? Im assuming yes, because when I originally tested this, I had a server off the same 16port switch and the SXT is off that and still didn’t work when I added the static route on the SXT itself.
Also, you are misunderstanding the point of the static route on the SXT.
By putting in the static route on the SXT on house #1, you are making it possible for the SXT itself to be able to send packets to any device in house #2, but not receive anything back. By putting the static route on the SXT in house #2, you are making it possible for the SXT itself in house #2 to be able to send packets to any device in house #1, but not receive anything back.
Adding the static routes does allow the SXT’s to fire packets at any device at either house. But the remaining issue is that the devices in the houses receive the packet but have no proper route to reply, and will try to send the reply to the ATT Uverse, which will likely simply try forwarding it out to the Internet where it will get dropped at some point.
Also, all of your traffic from devices in home #1 to home #2 is bridged through the radios, rather than routed, so adding a static route on the SXT has no effect on those packets since they are not being routed by the SXT, it is bridging them. Adding those static routes would allow RouterOS itself on the SXT radio to send SNMP traps or syslog log messages to any device in any house but doesn’t do anything beyond that due to those problems. I do not think it is very likely that you care about whether RouterOS can send SNMP traps or syslog messages to your smart fridge or whatever, and it is more likely that you want to provide connectivity between the devices in the two houses.
Yes, if you didn’t use the Uverse as a wireless client, it will work, but you would need a layer 3 switch - you need something to do the routing, and a layer 2 switch can’t do that.
As a follow-up, you COULD configure the SXT’s to do routing. However, the problem for reaching the other home becomes how to let the devices in house #1 know that the SXT is a router and has a route to house #2. This would entail programming the static route manually on all individual devices in both homes, or giving all devices the route through DHCP options which is rather complicated because you have to convert the static route to a hexadecimal pattern. Adding these rare DHCP options probably isn’t even supported by your UVerse if it doesn’t support static routes to begin with. If you can switch off the DHCP server on the Uverse and run a DHCP server on something else, it is possible, but still will be difficult to configure and some more specialized devices might ignore these DHCP options and not have a route to the other home.
Ok, so really best option is going to be to probably just leave the Uverse Gateway and the Asus Router behind it as the DMZPlus.
I could do the option of changing out the 16port with a layer3 16port switch (was planning on getting a PoE version anyways) and then would still need the Asus turned into an AP since you mentioned wireless clients off the Uverse Gateway wont know how to get to the other house.
