I have a Senao AP running, clients can connect no hassles (normal Laptops, or other Senao’s Bridges)
I’m trying to configure a RB133C witha Atheros (AR5212) radio, so that it can be plugged into a switch on the rmeote side, and allow access to all wired PC’s to the main network on the AP side.
Is it possible? I have tried creating a bridge, and adding the ether1, and wlan1 to the bridge, the routerboard can ping the entire network, but not the PC’s connceted via ether1.
Help, please 
yes, you can. this is an ususal situation on more networks. mikrotik offers many tools to do that. you may use wds mode on ap an client side, but i offer you to make some eoip-tunnel and thats all. everything recently introduced in documentation. because of that nobody answered your post i suppose.
P.S. If rb is 133c it is CPE, i.e. do not try wds. just eoip-tunnel both sites enought to transfer ip networks.
This sounds almost exactly what I’ve been trying to accomplish for the last couple of days.
Some of my goals, perhaps, differ from what you’re trying to accomplish. In particular, I want my rb133c to be opportunistic about connecting to open access points (mobile application). First step was to ditch the ssid (unchecked box) in the wireless config for the card and then to add a connection list entry (again blank ssid). Next I created a bridge with both the wireless and wired interfaces… and just to make sure that the opportunistic association was happening (and so I could manage the rb133c with winbox), I setup a dhcp-client on wlan1. This worked pretty much as advertised… the wlan1 bound dhcp-client picks up and IP address from the host network (using an open linksys wap11 and vivato panel to bridge through to the wired network)
That part works… and so does the the laptop on ether1 (gets an IP, default gateway and DNS servers from the host network via wireless… so broadcasts are transmitted and responses received)
But then things get weird. The laptop on ether1 can’t see anything besides the the IP address assigned to wlan1 by the dhcp-client. DNS times out default gateway is unpingable. Working from the serial port, the rb133c works fine (can ping out by hostname). I noticed some other odd things trying to debug this puzzler. First, if I assign an unused IP address from the hostnetwork to ether1, the dhcp-client won’t pick up an IP for wlan1 (but removing the dhcp-client on wlan1 doesn’t help the laptop on ether1 communicate with the rest of the world). Second, I decided to try setting a static IP config on the laptop based on the previous leases it had received from the host network, but with one small change… I set the default gateway to the IP address assigned to wlan1. After that, I could sometimes pathping out to the internet by IP address (DNS still broken), but this wasn’t consistent.
I’m really confused by the whole thing and I haven’t seen anyone with a similar config after combing the wiki and forums for the past week. A post on this topic in another area of the forum basically resulted in: why don’t you introduce another layer 3 separation between the wired and wireless sides by using NAT (I explained my reasons for wanting to stay at layer 2 and pretty much got ignored). Now I just want to know why the config doesn’t work… because it seems like it should. Maybe if I had access to a full-blown shell I could get to the bottom of this.
At this point, I think it has something to do with the way that the connection list thing works and how the radio needs to be in station mode (and maybe some of the limitations inherent to station mode).
It’s things like this that make DDWRT look attractive.
The Senao (Non-Mikrotik) AP does not run eoip tunnels, therefore there are not two mikrotiks that can talk.
I’m simply needing a basic wireless AP bought for home use briding setup.
ie. The mikrotik board must wirelessly bridge the network cable. Is this what you are explaining?
http://www.cyberbajt.com/cyber.php?get=raport,356,90,359 - I followed this example on eoip - no luck.
RedBull -
You said you created a bridge, added eth1 and wlan1 (RB133) to it but you were not able to ping the PCs on the network but could ping the whole network - what does that mean? Were you pinging xx.xx.xx.255 the broadcast address?
Anyway - what did you have for an IP on your laptop - same IP range and netmask as you ‘main’ network? If so then you may need to turn on proxy something like proxy-arp on the far side (AP) ethernet port. Or you may need to turn that on for your Wlan1 in the RB133.
anontrol- what you are doing is pretty much totally different that what RedBull is trying to accomplish. I think you basic issue is two fold. You need to set a default route and you need to set a default route / rule. Secondly, you need to use nat (since you are not bridging) to masqurade whatever your laptop IP to that of your wlan. You can look at the Wiki for setting up a dynamic DSL connection and that should tell you enough to be able to do what you are trying to accomplish.
Once the bridge is created with Ether1 and WLan1 ports added to it, and an ip of 192.168.1.6/24, I can ping any destination from within Winbox’s ping tool, but not from the PC connected via cable to the RB133.
to try and put it “graphically”
ADSL—PC1—AP
|
|
RB133C—PC2
RB133C can ping ADSL, PC1, AP, PC2
PC1 can ping RB133C
PC2 can only ping RB133C
RedBull -
What is the IP of PC2?
What about your default route/gateway? Do you have one of those in your RB133?
Usually you have to also add a default route/rule as well. Winbox / Ip / Route then the Rule tab: src-addr 0.0.0.0/0 dst-addr 0.0.0.0/0 action - lookup Table - set to main. Your gateway IP should be that of your AP or maybe your PC1 if that is the ‘actual’ gateway.
Thanks GalaxyNet, I’ll give that a go when I get home tonight.. someone suggested to add a firewall rule for srcnat->masquerade, oddly that allowed the remote PC’s to access the internet, but not the local lan. - stopped working after a while though.
All IP’s are in the 192.168.1.x range
AP (Senao): 192.186.1.3
Bridge1 (Senao): 192.168.1.4
Bridge2 (Senao): 192.186.1.5
Bridge3 (Mikrotik): 192.168.1.6 (Bridge’s IP)
ADSL: 192.168.1.10
PC’s: 192.168.1.100-200
anontrol- what you are doing is pretty much totally different that what RedBull is trying to accomplish.
Uh… no. It’s pretty much the same. The only difference is that he has settled on a known ssid / access point.
I think you basic issue is two fold. You need to set a default route and you need to set a default route / rule.
Default route gets set by DHCP for the ether1 connected test laptop. The problem is that the bridge I have configured doesn’t seem to be allowing packets to get to the default route via the wireless interface.
Secondly, you need to use nat (since you are not bridging) to masqurade whatever your laptop IP to that of your wlan.
No. I’m bridging… it’s just that the bridge isn’t behaving the way that I would expect… probably because I’m keeping the wireless interface in station mode (because that’s the only way I can use the connection list feature to hop around between open aps as they become available).
You can look at the Wiki […]
The wiki as almost nothing on it that addresses this configuration scenario.
anontrol -
Yes anontrol what you are doing is very different than RedBull, a mobile opportunistic setup is FAR different than a fixed setup.
The wiki DOES have info on what you are trying to accomplish - think dynamic dsl - applied to wireless instead of ethernet…
For your setup to work - you should not be in bridge mode unless all the APs you are connecting to are set to bridge. Are they all in bridge mode?
If they are then you might be able to accomplish what you are attempting by setting up a pseudo bridge like you have done, but you’ll need to masq’d your laptop IP in the bridge / nat section. You may also have to set some paramenters in the Broute section as well. And you well may need to set the default /route / rule to what I told RedBull above.
If they are not - then quit trying to use bridge mode at all…use a dynamic IP / station mode and standard firewall/nat masq’ing.
I don’t appreciate being flamed on another person’s post either - you should start your own thread when what you are doing is not very very similar to what the original thread starter had in mind - that’s called manners.
Lastly - if you know the answer then why are you asking all these questions? The bridge isn’t acting the way you’d expect it to but it IS acting the way it is suppose to. So the obvious answer here is you don’t know quite as much as you think you do - so quit being a smarta#$ and play nice.
I added the Route Rule, nothing much has changed. Do I need to add a route as well?
There was only the default route of:
Destination: 192.168.1.0/24
Pref. Source: 192.168.1.6
Interface: bridge1
RedBull -
Yep a default route as well - dst-addr 0.0.0.0/0 gateway (I am guessing) 192.168.1.1
I have a ADSL router on the same cabled network as the Senao AP.
The Senao has ip 192.168.1.3
The ADSL has ip 192.168.1.10 - I’ve used this adress as the gateway for the default route. No Luck
I’m starting to think it’s not possible! - as impossible as that sounds.
RedBull -
Would you go in to terminal mode and get your; IP addesses, interfaces, bridges and routes and post back here…obviously there is something fundamentaly wrong with your configuration that we haven’t seen so far.
Thom
I hope this is what you’re looking for:
IP Addresses
ADDRESS NETWORK BROADCAST INTERFACE
0 192.168.1.6/24 192.168.1.0 192.168.1.255 bridge1
Interfaces0 R ether1 ether 0 0 1500
1 R wlan1 wlan 0 0 1500
2 R bridge1 bridge 0 0 1500
Bridges0 R name=“bridge1” mtu=1500 arp=enabled mac-address=00:02:6F:48:64:00 stp=no
priority=32768 ageing-time=5m forward-delay=15s
garbage-collection-interval=5s hello-time=2s max-message-age=20sRoutes
DST-ADDRESS PREF-SRC G GATEWAY DISTANCE INTERFACE
0 ADC 192.168.1.0/24 192.168.1.6 bridge1
1 A S 0.0.0.0/0 r 192.168.1.10 bridge1
PS. I can run a /system reset, and configure from scratch if that’s easier.
Thanks for all your help!
RedBull -
Yes - that is what I was looking for…I did not see anything out of the ordinary at first glance so -
The IP on your PC - 192.168.1.100-200, netmask is 255.255.255.0 (windows). Gateway is the bridge, the senao, or the dsl IP? Should probably be the Senao…
Is your wireless card in bridge mode? Winbox, look under wireless, double click on Wlan1, second tab - wireless, look at the mode box. Is the card in station mode or bridge mode? Should be in bridge mode for the Senao…
Let us know.
Thom
The Atheros radio on the Mikrotik is is in station mode. Can only change when I get back home again..
Yeah, IP’s:
Gateway Site (My house):
ADSL: 192.168.1.10
Senao AP: 192.168.1.3
My PC: 192.168.1.100
Client Side (Brothers House):
RB133C: 192.168.1.6
Brothers PC: 192.168.1.200
If I put the MT into Bridge, the client connection to my (Non Mikrotik) AP is lost, and the status changes to “running ap”, in station, it searches then goes to “Connected to ess”.
RedBull -
There are two bridge modes for the wireless card - ‘AP Bridge’ and just ‘bridge’.
If you Senao is in bridge mode then your wireless card needs to be in just ‘Bridge’ mode.
The alternative for all this is if bridge mode doesn’t work is to use EoIP tunnels. There your card would go back to station mode, and we set up an EoIP tunnel.
Give the card bridge mode a try first…
Thom
Bridge mode doesn’t work, wlan1 never gets a connection. I have tried EOIP Tunnels - I didn’t get it working, but that’s more than likely just me doing something wrong.
Thing is, eoip tunnels seemed like it needed a MT on both sides.