Hi all,
I have created a wireless bridge using LHG XL 52 ac. You can read about what I did exactly in the link below. The setup is basically like follows:

[internet] <- (phone line) -> [ISP DSL modem running DHCP server] <- (2.4 GHz n) -> [WiFi repeater] <- (2.4 GHz n) -> [LHG XL 52 ac] <- (Ethernet) -> [Switch] <- (Ethernet) -> Laptop, Xbox, PS4, etc

viewtopic.php?t=194884

The laptop, xbox, ps4 can all get DHCP addresses. However, when I make the LHG use a DHCP client, it cannot obtain the IP. It just keeps saying "searching". Also if I set a static IP in the right range and with the right ip mask, it still cannot be pinged from my desktop. The desktop pc can always reach the LHG using the mac protocol. I just want the LHG to be able to connect to the internet so that I can auto-update, use the web interface, NTP, etc.

The LHG wlan1 interface is set to "station-pseudobridge" mode. And the only interface I can run the DHCP client on is "bridge", the bridge interface that ties together the wireless and the ethernet. It won't let me run the dhcp client on either wlan1 or ethernet because it doesn't want to run on a slave interface.

What should I do to make DHCP work?

Thanks

I reported the DHCP issue as a bug as this seems like something that ought to work.

It's not a bug, just read the manual...

Mode station-pseudobridge

[…] MAC address translation limits access to station device from AP side to IPv4 based access […]

This mode […] should be avoided when possible […]

It's not a bug, just read the manual...

Mode station-pseudobridge

[…] MAC address translation limits access to station device from AP side to IPv4 based access […]

This mode […] should be avoided when possible […]

This doesn't say that DHCP won't work. It just means that the other modes are preferable when possible, but that is only possible if the other side of the wireless connection is also MikroTik hardware, which is not the case here, therefore "avoiding this mode is not possible". It doesn't mean it's "broken" or whatever.

That's what I'm trying to do, access it via IPv4. So I don't see what you're trying to say. Can you talk in whole sentences? This whole copy pasting manual lines without explanation shtick is very passive aggressive and clearly isn't helping the situation either.

I find it more correct to report the manual and references rather than invent baseless answers.

Since you want a simple answer, without reading or understanding the manuals, here it is:

It can't be done (if the two devices are not both MikroTik) and is the expected behaviour.

At most, put the client as a "station" and recreate a separate DHCP and NAT, but which divides the networks.

I find it more correct to report the manual and references rather than invent baseless answers.

Since you want a simple answer, without reading or understanding the manuals, here it is:

It can't be done (if the two devices are not both MikroTik) and is the expected behaviour.

At most, put the client as a "station" and recreate a separate DHCP and NAT, but which divides the networks.

Nothing that you quoted in the manual actually says what you said here. I'm just going to ignore your messages from now on. It seems like you have a habit of posting a lot.

I'm just going to ignore your messages from now on. It seems like you have a habit of posting a lot.

You, on the other hand, have a habit of not accepting answers you don't like. Good luck...