Results 1 to 2 of 2
I'm living at a friend's right now, and he's got a wireless access point in the house that I set my laptops wlan0 interface to route through the eth0 to ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 09-13-2010 #1
Setting up a subnet on a wireless network...
I'm living at a friend's right now, and he's got a wireless access point in the house that I set my laptops wlan0 interface to route through the eth0 to my desktop. It's been working fine for internet sharing and internal networking ( ssh and ftp ) between the laptop and the desktop, but there's a problem with both subnets being able to communicate with each other, and I haven't been able to solve it with DNAT either.
The wireless access point is 192.168.0.1 and has its own lan on 192.168.0.0/24 of which my laptop is 192.168.0.5. I setup the little subnet I created by routing with the laptop to 192.168.1.0/24 and my desktop is 192.168.1.50. With shorewall I can configure iptables to DNAT all of my ssh traffic destined to 192.168.0.5 to 192.168.1.50, but the problem seems to occur when ssh on my desktop fails to connect rather than the DNAT failing.
Using iptraf I've seen that all of the routing does work properly, because I can see on the connection in iptraf that only the SYN packet is being sent from a 192.168.0.x address, there is no ACK packet sent back. I believe this is because in the connection dialog it always shows a 192.168.0.x ip as the source of the connection, but I don't have a route to 192.168.0.0/24 from 192.168.1.0/24 setup and I'm unsure of how to do so.
I'm pretty much in over my head because I don't know what is wrong, I thought it should work like this. Everything else from port configurations, to the configurations of the software itself seems fine so I don't think it's anything like that preventing a connection, but I can't think of what it would be aside from the lack of routing between each subnet.
Is there anyway to just add a route so that 192.168.1.0/24 and 192.168.0.0/24 can communicate with each other directly? I know there should be, I'm just not at all sure how it would be done.
- 09-14-2010 #2
A proper subnet mask should make this possible. In this case it would be something like 255.255.0.0, which covers the 192.168.0.0/16 subnet. For the 192.168.0.0/23 subnet it should be 255.255.254.0, but please correct me if I'm wrong.