Gargoyle Forum

yeah............................................

Networking 101

Okay then. I believe I'm getting this understood now. It isn't that the firewall isn't working, it is simply that there are firewall features that aren't, and those features also are needed for quotas to work. I am willing to accept that such was the way it was decided to program the system.

Very good illustrations, all.

I cannot change the functional settings of the ISP router very much at all. I need it to be wireless because by cell phone only works indoors thru its WiFi. Mostly, I can only change IP addresses and DHCP pool range. So it stays 192.168.1.1.

Next comes Gargoyle router. I do not understand why I should set it as a separate subnet. I'm a little dense on that point. Please explain. (Not about being dense; I can't fix that. )

Thanks, guys.

@ ispyisail
You'd think that, but of course you would be wrong. I do what I do for good reasons and they are too deep for you. Don't try to judge what you can't understand. Besides your "comment" serves no purpose. No one needs trolls. Please go away.

My usual policy for these situations is to say sorry and move on.

Sorry

I'll steal a few explanations from someone else

Routers are essentially devices that connect two different subnets. That is their purpose.
The most common example is connecting the outside world (the internet) to your local network.

When your machine wants to communicate with another machine, it first resolves the IP address of that machine (by whatever mechanism, usually DNS, but it's not important right now). It then needs to make a decision about whether or not that resolved IP address is local (on the same subnet) or non-local. It does this by comparing it's own address and subnet mask with the other machine's IP.

If both IPs fall in the same subnet, then your machine ARPs for it's local hardware/ethernet address. ARP stands for address resolution protocol, and is a way for machines on the same subnet to resolve IP addresses to a lower layer address. It is done by sending a broadcast to every active machine on the network and asking "hey, who has 192.168.1.2?" for example.

In reference to the last bit, the router never gets involved. The device just broadcasts this request and hopes someone responds. If the router isn't listening, then someone on the other side of the fence (the WAN) won't get the message.
If the device decides that the ip is on the other side of the fence, it will message the router and ask it if it knows who/where that IP address is. The router then handles routing (go figure ) of the transmission to the right place.

Thanks.

In reference to the last bit, the router never gets involved. The device just broadcasts this request and hopes someone responds. If the router isn't listening, then someone on the other side of the fence (the WAN) won't get the message.

Yes, very much like a hub.

As I understand your point, your view of "routing" is that which takes place outside the LAN. That is an interesting viewpoint.

If one wishes to be totally confused, one can consider a device commonly called a Gateway, which combines a switch, router, and modem. But lets not go there. I will point out that my router 1 is basically that, with the addition of an ATA. Very cool.

In any case, I'm going to take a little time today and reprogram the routers 2 and 3 as you guys suggested. It is good to learn about how Gargoyle works and a little about the thought processes behind the applied methodology. I'll let you know how everything works out.

Thanks again.

I have upgraded from my router 1.6.2 to 1.9.1. I have also AP that has not been changed (firmware and config wise). It seems that any komputer connected via AP, although obtains correct IP from DHCP on updated router, can only see local network. DNS works on computer client, but ping tracert etc reports problems with routing. The only change in the entire configuration is the new firmware 1.9.1. It was fine on 1.6.2.

If however I connect client computer via wifi to the router by switching off AP, routing works fine and client computer can brows net. Turn on AP and client does not see outside local network.

All devices, AP and client computer get IP from DHCP from the router.

Any ideas what can be wrong with routing?

1. router with 1.9.1 (WAN IP + LAN DHCP)
2. AP gets IP from DHCP on router via WIFI
3. client computer IP from DHCP on router via AP WIFI (can be ethernet or wifi)

A little confusing. First, please define your acronym "AP". Second, it sounds as though you may be off topic for two reasons; A, you indicate it might a firmware issue, and B, you are not indicating how it applies to this topic.

Would love to help if we can, but please be more specific.

Thanks.

Hi slow_speed

I have added post here since I have issue between router and AP (access point) or rather with clients connected via AP to the router.

I have 2 floors in the locations.
router located in the upper floor. All devices located in the upper floor connect to router over wifi directly. Those include windows,android and printer devices
AP located in the lower floor. All devices connect to router over wifi via AP. Those are printer, android, windows, linux devices


Below I have gathered some details:

Router :TP-Link TL-WDR3600 v1 Gorgoyle 1.9.1
Access Point: TP-Link TL-WA854RE original TPLINK soft

Router
----------------------------------------------------------------|
| Gargoyle version 1.9.1 | OpenWrt Chaos Calmer branch |
| Gargoyle revision 55922fb | OpenWrt commit eadf19c |
| Built July 07, 2016 | Target ar71xx/usb |
------------------------------------------------------------------
~# ip a
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether f8:1a:67:eb:ca:52 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
10: br-lan: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default
inet 192.168.2.3/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global br-lan
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
11: eth0.1@eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue master br-lan state UP group default
12: eth0.2@eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue state UP group default
inet 89.x.x.x/22 brd 89.x.x.x scope global eth0.2
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
13: wlan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq master br-lan state UP group default qlen 1000

~# ip r
default via 89.x.x.1 dev eth0.2 proto static src 89.x.x.191
89.x.x.0/22 dev eth0.2 proto kernel scope link src 89.x.x.191
89.x.x.1 dev eth0.2 proto static scope link src 89.x.x.191
192.168.2.0/24 dev br-lan proto kernel scope link src 192.168.2.3

If I connect client with no NO AP in between I have the following:

client
$ nslookup www.gargoyle-router.com
Server: 127.0.1.1
Address: 127.0.1.1#53

Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.gargoyle-router.com
Address: 66.228.45.220

$ ip r
default via 192.168.2.3 dev wlan0 proto static
192.168.2.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.2.150 metric 9

tracepath www.gargoyle-router.com
1?: [LOCALHOST] pmtu 1500
1: Gargoyle 4.888ms
1: Gargoyle 2.375ms
2: 89-x-x-1.dynamic.chello.pl 28.657ms
3: 89-x-x-1.infra.chello.pl 9.813ms
4: pl-waw04a-rc1-ae16-2158.aorta.net 33.025ms asymm 10
5: no reply
6: nl-ams04a-ri2-ae10-0.aorta.net 32.695ms asymm 7
7: ae-6.r25.amstnl02.nl.bb.gin.ntt.net 33.551ms asymm 8
8: ae-5.r23.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 130.126ms asymm 10
9: ae-0.r22.asbnva02.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 128.571ms asymm 10
10: ae-5.r25.nycmny01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 127.041ms asymm 11
11: ae-2.r08.nycmny01.us.bb.gin.ntt.net 135.049ms asymm 12
12: 192.80.16.18 139.509ms
13: 173.255.239.5 136.163ms
14: li326-220.members.linode.com 138.591ms reached
Resume: pmtu 1500 hops 14 back 14

ip a
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
inet6 ::1/128 scope host
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
3: wlan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP group default qlen 1000
inet 192.168.2.150/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global wlan0
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

DHCP has mac reservation so clients will have the same address.

If I connect the same client via AP, with AP connected to router

client
ip a
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
3: wlan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UP group default qlen 1000
inet 192.168.2.150/24 brd 192.168.2.255 scope global wlan0
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

~ $ ip r
default via 192.168.2.3 dev wlan0 proto static
192.168.2.0/24 dev wlan0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.2.150 metric 9

~ $ nslookup www.gargoyle-router.com
Server: 127.0.1.1
Address: 127.0.1.1#53

Non-authoritative answer:
Name: www.gargoyle-router.com
Address: 66.228.45.220
-- DNS still works ---

$ ping -c 3 www.gargoyle-router.com
PING www.gargoyle-router.com (66.228.45.220) 56(84) bytes of data.
From Gargoyle.zabki.p1 (192.168.2.3) icmp_seq=1 Destination Port Unreachable
From Gargoyle.zabki.p1 (192.168.2.3) icmp_seq=2 Destination Port Unreachable
From Gargoyle.zabki.p1 (192.168.2.3) icmp_seq=3 Destination Port Unreachable
--- www.gargoyle-router.com ping statistics ---
3 packets transmitted, 0 received, +3 errors, 100% packet loss, time 2001ms

--- ping not working anymore ---

~ $ tracepath www.gargoyle-router.com
1?: [LOCALHOST] pmtu 1500
1: Gargoyle 8.222ms
1: Gargoyle 6.035ms
2: Gargoyle 7.315ms reached
Resume: pmtu 1500 hops 2 back 1

--- seems we stop at the router and we are not going anywhere ---

~ $ ping 192.168.2.5 (AP)
PING 192.168.2.5 (192.168.2.5) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.2.5: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=5.97 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.5: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=1.68 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.5: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=3.48 ms

~ $ ping 192.168.2.3 (router)
PING 192.168.2.3 (192.168.2.3) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.2.3: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=5.31 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.3: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=5.35 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.2.3: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=5.32 ms

AP GUI shows the connection to internet is in OK mode (becasue AP is directly connected to router). However any other device connected to AP can only access local area, including router but not beyond the router.

Router had the same settings using Gorg.. 1.6.2 and devices connected via AP had access to the net. After router has been upgrade to Gorg 1.9.1, this is no longer the case.

I have not yet reverted to Gorg 1.6.2 but may do so soon If I do not find solution to this issue.

Any help would be welcomed.

I have always disliked the term “access point” when it is used non-specifically. Basically it means a point were communication connections come together, sort of like a hub, and it implies one may be bringing these communication lines together to reach out to some other network of any type.

With that said, if one looks the definition up, most always it most often really means WAP or “wireless access point”. As you can see, that would imply that there is a wired type. Go figure.

In one sense of the phrase, a router is an access point, whether offering wired or wireless capabilities. In your situation, as in most, I guess it really doesn't matter which way we look at it because we are basically just dealing with the Internet and a couple routers making connection with it. So let's just take it from there.

Each router offers different settings and often uses differing terminology when describing those settings. Being familiar with how each programmer viewed the settings is important. In other words, the stock TP-Link is going to be quite different from the Gargoyle one.

Basically, this is where all the confusion comes into play. It is as simple as that. As you can see, that was my whole issue here with my problem.

First, don't change the Gargoyle firmware. Always use the latest when it comes to firmware. It does bother me that you have this huge jump from 1.6.2 to 1.9.1. Surely there were a lot of changes between these versions.?.?

Second, you may want to change the stock one to Gargoyle, if it is available. I cannot speak to the feature list comparison between stock and Gargoyle as I have no experience in that. It is only good because it will then make them both with the same settings and terminologies. Otherwise, maybe it is of no value.

Third, a simple way to handle the issue is to understand the fact that they are both using WAP, and therefore are both access points when it comes to wireless. Therefore, one can basically do one of two things that comes to mind right now:
1. Make them both on the same network.
2. Make them on different sub-nets.

In the first case, one would want to make sure that the routers are set to use separate sections of the same IP range without any overlap, while allowing them to do their own DHCP service. Of course Gargoyle allows fairly fine granularity in settings for this, and one hopes the stock one does as well.

Start with that configuration first and see what happens.

Remember that confusion comes in everywhere, most notably from bad programming and from not simplifying our diagnosis. All you care about is that you can or cannot get Internet access from connections thru both routers, and I assume all nodes should see all others (please state if such is not the case). Be careful of where you note the gateway address for the second router. It should most likely be the first router.

Good luck.

@nietszch3

1.9.1 is a bit buggy

try 1.9.x

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=9415

If you still have problem you might want to start a new thread with some screen shots

also don't install any backup configs, do a fresh install and/ or failsafe reset