OK, I setup a bridge, and now I can't access gargoyle. I tried resetting the router with the reset button on the back of the WRT54GS, but nothing happened, except now the bridge doesn't work anymore.
My router, and the router I'm bridging to, all have different IP addresses. 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.0.1 respectively.
The only thing I changed on the bridging dialog screen is I selected the bridge to LAN checkbox so that I could use it wired instead of wireless. That seemed to work, other than the fact I could no longer access the router.
After I tried to use the hardware reset button, the router no longer bridges, so no internet anymore either.
It appears that DHCP no longer works on the wired connection either.
Any ideas?
Setup bridge, now I can't access Gargoyle
Moderator: Moderators
Re: Setup bridge, now I can't access Gargoyle
OK, I don't really understand what went wrong, but I found this post:
http://www.gargoyle-router.com/phpbb/vi ... p?f=6&t=90
I suspected I may have the same problem since my router's IP is 192.168.1.1 and the router I'm bridging to has the IP 192.168.0.1 so while plugged in with a wired connection, I set my IP to a static IP of 192.168.1.100 and voila! Suddenly I can connect to my router!
OK, now I want to get a better understanding of what went wrong so it won't happen again. I plan to use my router on the go with several portable computers. I want to be able to stick the router someplace in a wifi hotspot, configure it to bridge, and then connect all my PC's to it.
Am I to understand that if the wireless hotspot I'm trying to use has an IP different from 192.168.1.x, then I'll have to manually configure the router to match it, or else everything will be mysteriously borked? Is this something that could be done automatically and painlessly?
For example, if the hotspot router I want to bridge to has an IP of 192.168.0.1, as in this case, then I will have to change my router IP to an unused IP between 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.255? Can this be handled automatically? Instead of asking here, I'd just do it to see if it works, but this area seems to lead to problems when using trial and error for experimenting.
At the very LEAST, there ought to be some detailed context help in the form of a note on the configuration page that warns of this problem before people get into it!
And, why the heck doesn't the reset button work? I was counting on that to save me during my trial and error experimentation in case I goofed something. If it's a platform dependent firmware issue, then it ought alse to be noted that care must be taken because the reset button can't save you!
http://www.gargoyle-router.com/phpbb/vi ... p?f=6&t=90
I suspected I may have the same problem since my router's IP is 192.168.1.1 and the router I'm bridging to has the IP 192.168.0.1 so while plugged in with a wired connection, I set my IP to a static IP of 192.168.1.100 and voila! Suddenly I can connect to my router!
OK, now I want to get a better understanding of what went wrong so it won't happen again. I plan to use my router on the go with several portable computers. I want to be able to stick the router someplace in a wifi hotspot, configure it to bridge, and then connect all my PC's to it.
Am I to understand that if the wireless hotspot I'm trying to use has an IP different from 192.168.1.x, then I'll have to manually configure the router to match it, or else everything will be mysteriously borked? Is this something that could be done automatically and painlessly?
For example, if the hotspot router I want to bridge to has an IP of 192.168.0.1, as in this case, then I will have to change my router IP to an unused IP between 192.168.0.1 and 192.168.0.255? Can this be handled automatically? Instead of asking here, I'd just do it to see if it works, but this area seems to lead to problems when using trial and error for experimenting.
At the very LEAST, there ought to be some detailed context help in the form of a note on the configuration page that warns of this problem before people get into it!
And, why the heck doesn't the reset button work? I was counting on that to save me during my trial and error experimentation in case I goofed something. If it's a platform dependent firmware issue, then it ought alse to be noted that care must be taken because the reset button can't save you!
Re: Setup bridge, now I can't access Gargoyle
I think I've pinned down a critical weakness in the way Gargoyle handles bridging. If the system that the Gargoyle router is bridging to goes down, or the connection is lost for other reasons, like bad weather, then the Gargoyle router can no longer be reached via it's IP address.
It appears that once my DHCP lease from the lost bridge connection expires, Gargoyle will not take over and give out an IP address. So, the user (me) is left wondering why it could happen that I'm directly plugged into my router, but I can't communicate with it, or get a DHCP IP. I think this is the "netmask issue", where I can't communicate with any other IP range than the one that I've got on my PC.
To make this more clear:
* The router I want to bridge to has a gateway IP of 192.168.0.1
* I set Gargoyle's IP to 192.168.0.100 because I have to set Gargoyle to have an unused IP in the range 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.255 or else it will not be able to bridge to the router with the IP 192.168.0.1. In other words, 192.168.0.100 will work, but 192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.100, and 192.168.100.100 will not work. The only number that I can pick is the last one. The 192.168.0. portion must remain the same as the router I'm bridging to. I'm not sure why this is, it seems odd that this restriction should be in place for a bridged connection when it's not this way for any other connections that I know of.
* My PC has to follow the same restriction. I have to either get an unused IP via DHCP in the range 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.255, or I have to manually set it.
* If DHCP isn't working for whatever reason, then my PC will obtain an "automatic private IP address" that won't be in the range 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.255. I think this setting can be manually adjusted in the tcp/ip properties for the connection, under the "alternate configuration" tab in windows XP, but I haven't tried it.
* I manually set a static IP 192.168.0.150 because I remembered this problem and how to solve it. If this connection had been stable for two years before it went down, or had to be changed, I would probably not remember the IP address I had set for the router, and even if I did, I wouldn't remember that I need to set a static IP that matches the router IP before I will be able to connect to it. With no way to communicate with the router, and no way to find out what's wrong, I would probably wrongly assume that the router needs to be replaced, as other people here have.
I think an easy solution to this problem is for the router to fallback AP mode, and enabling DHCP, if the bridge connection fails. That way I'll still be able to access the router to see that the bridge connection failed, and the router itself is OK and still functioning. That's important, not just as a matter of convenience, but also from a reliability perspective. The ENTIRE NETWORK FAILS if only the bridge portion of it fails, and there's currently no automatic fallback that can recover from the fault, and even worse, THERE'S NO WAY TO KNOW WHAT'S WRONG without some serious headbanging and hair pulling. If the router were accessible, it could TELL ME WHAT'S WRONG by saying "BRIDGE CONNECTION FAILED, AUTOMATICALLY REVERTED BACK TO AP MODE UNTIL BRIDGE CONNECTION BECOMES FUNCTIONAL AGAIN".
That way, I'd lose the bridge connection, but the rest of the network would still function. I don't know what would happen if there were multiple routers in the network. Would that be a problem with the solution I've suggested above? I suspect it might be, if you've got 20 repeaters extending coverage througout a building, and the last link at the bridge connection fails, then they'd all be handing out DHCP IP addresses. That's better than nothing though, because you could still isolate one of them, and it'd tell you right away why it's not working, instead of just blinking it's lights at you. I suppose you could code them up to negotiate with each other to keep the network functional, but that's not so necessary as long as the router still functions enough to tell me what's wrong.
As it is, the router seems to be bricked if the bridge connection fails, which is totally unacceptable. I'd have to put a note on the router detailing this problem so whoever has to deal with it has a way to know what's wrong, since the router will refuse to communicate.
It appears that once my DHCP lease from the lost bridge connection expires, Gargoyle will not take over and give out an IP address. So, the user (me) is left wondering why it could happen that I'm directly plugged into my router, but I can't communicate with it, or get a DHCP IP. I think this is the "netmask issue", where I can't communicate with any other IP range than the one that I've got on my PC.
To make this more clear:
* The router I want to bridge to has a gateway IP of 192.168.0.1
* I set Gargoyle's IP to 192.168.0.100 because I have to set Gargoyle to have an unused IP in the range 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.255 or else it will not be able to bridge to the router with the IP 192.168.0.1. In other words, 192.168.0.100 will work, but 192.168.1.1, 192.168.1.100, and 192.168.100.100 will not work. The only number that I can pick is the last one. The 192.168.0. portion must remain the same as the router I'm bridging to. I'm not sure why this is, it seems odd that this restriction should be in place for a bridged connection when it's not this way for any other connections that I know of.
* My PC has to follow the same restriction. I have to either get an unused IP via DHCP in the range 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.255, or I have to manually set it.
* If DHCP isn't working for whatever reason, then my PC will obtain an "automatic private IP address" that won't be in the range 192.168.0.1 to 192.168.0.255. I think this setting can be manually adjusted in the tcp/ip properties for the connection, under the "alternate configuration" tab in windows XP, but I haven't tried it.
* I manually set a static IP 192.168.0.150 because I remembered this problem and how to solve it. If this connection had been stable for two years before it went down, or had to be changed, I would probably not remember the IP address I had set for the router, and even if I did, I wouldn't remember that I need to set a static IP that matches the router IP before I will be able to connect to it. With no way to communicate with the router, and no way to find out what's wrong, I would probably wrongly assume that the router needs to be replaced, as other people here have.
I think an easy solution to this problem is for the router to fallback AP mode, and enabling DHCP, if the bridge connection fails. That way I'll still be able to access the router to see that the bridge connection failed, and the router itself is OK and still functioning. That's important, not just as a matter of convenience, but also from a reliability perspective. The ENTIRE NETWORK FAILS if only the bridge portion of it fails, and there's currently no automatic fallback that can recover from the fault, and even worse, THERE'S NO WAY TO KNOW WHAT'S WRONG without some serious headbanging and hair pulling. If the router were accessible, it could TELL ME WHAT'S WRONG by saying "BRIDGE CONNECTION FAILED, AUTOMATICALLY REVERTED BACK TO AP MODE UNTIL BRIDGE CONNECTION BECOMES FUNCTIONAL AGAIN".
That way, I'd lose the bridge connection, but the rest of the network would still function. I don't know what would happen if there were multiple routers in the network. Would that be a problem with the solution I've suggested above? I suspect it might be, if you've got 20 repeaters extending coverage througout a building, and the last link at the bridge connection fails, then they'd all be handing out DHCP IP addresses. That's better than nothing though, because you could still isolate one of them, and it'd tell you right away why it's not working, instead of just blinking it's lights at you. I suppose you could code them up to negotiate with each other to keep the network functional, but that's not so necessary as long as the router still functions enough to tell me what's wrong.
As it is, the router seems to be bricked if the bridge connection fails, which is totally unacceptable. I'd have to put a note on the router detailing this problem so whoever has to deal with it has a way to know what's wrong, since the router will refuse to communicate.
Re: Setup bridge, now I can't access Gargoyle
You're right in the sense that incorrect configuration of a wireless bridge can be non-trivial to fix. The whole point of a bridge vs. a router is that a bridge, if it is operating properly, should be transparent. You can login to it on the local subnet if you know the IP, but it should appear to be just another host on the network. You get dhcp dns etc. from the gateway, the bridge just transfers the data through it.
Trying to do some sort of fail-safe as you suggest is, however, problematic. The problem is that if the router re-configured itself every time the bridge connection went down, I KNOW there will be people complaining that after their gateway went down for some reason (e.g. tripped over the power cord), their bridge stopped working. Someone in THAT situation would be annoyed that they would have to reconfigure their bridge.
I'd rather err on the side of things staying the way the user put them, for good or for bad. I don't know of any bridging utilities that behave as you suggest (I'm guessing for the reasons that I cite). Could you point out another firmware/ utility that you think handles bridging better? I'm definitely willing to be convinced on this.
Trying to do some sort of fail-safe as you suggest is, however, problematic. The problem is that if the router re-configured itself every time the bridge connection went down, I KNOW there will be people complaining that after their gateway went down for some reason (e.g. tripped over the power cord), their bridge stopped working. Someone in THAT situation would be annoyed that they would have to reconfigure their bridge.
I'd rather err on the side of things staying the way the user put them, for good or for bad. I don't know of any bridging utilities that behave as you suggest (I'm guessing for the reasons that I cite). Could you point out another firmware/ utility that you think handles bridging better? I'm definitely willing to be convinced on this.
Re: Setup bridge, now I can't access Gargoyle
The failsafe should revert back to the previous settings once the bridge becomes operational again. It should be transparent, so if the bridge goes down, the router still works, and if the bridge comes back up, the bridge should begin working again.
Barring that, it ought to be abundantly clear to the user that this is an unresolved problem, detailing what to expect and how to fix it. A few sentences is all that's needed. You could even copy and paste portions of what I wrote to the firmware bridging screen. At least then people wouldn't be caught off guard when the bridge inevitably goes down.
Naturally, if I knew of software that did it better, I would be using that instead of posting here for suggestions to make Gargoyle better. I'm a new user, with no interest in Gargoyle per se, other than the fact that it's pretty good so far, and I foresee that it's rough edges will be polished since it's being actively maintained.
Barring that, it ought to be abundantly clear to the user that this is an unresolved problem, detailing what to expect and how to fix it. A few sentences is all that's needed. You could even copy and paste portions of what I wrote to the firmware bridging screen. At least then people wouldn't be caught off guard when the bridge inevitably goes down.
Naturally, if I knew of software that did it better, I would be using that instead of posting here for suggestions to make Gargoyle better. I'm a new user, with no interest in Gargoyle per se, other than the fact that it's pretty good so far, and I foresee that it's rough edges will be polished since it's being actively maintained.
Re: Setup bridge, now I can't access Gargoyle
I have this erxact same issue after recovering my router after a problem upgrading to gargoyle.
I now cannot access the router but it is broadcasting wirelessly! I have set a static IP address on my PC (192.168.1.100) but still cannot access the router using the IP address I gave it (192.188.1.199).
Helps!
I now cannot access the router but it is broadcasting wirelessly! I have set a static IP address on my PC (192.168.1.100) but still cannot access the router using the IP address I gave it (192.188.1.199).
Helps!