[Wylug-help] What am I missing (router question)

[Roger Greenwood]

On Tuesday 01 May 2007 01:05, Roger wrote:
> Roger Greenwood wrote:
> > On Monday 30 April 2007 22:03, Shaun Laughey wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 21:28 +0100, Roger Greenwood wrote:
> >>> On Monday 30 April 2007 21:18, Lee Evans wrote:
> >>>> What you want to do is give your hub/wireless access point an IP on
> >>>> the same subnet as your local machine [192.168.1.x]
> >>>
> >>> Thanks Lee,
>
> If I'm right, either you need to (best) set both bits of gear to the
> same ip range - 192.168.1.x or 192.168.0.x - or else you need to widen
> the mask from 255.255.255.0 (to 255.255.248.0 for instance) maybe as a
> step on the way.  

Step one - I reset my mask to 255.255.254.0 - this is the key, why didn't I 
think of that before ???
log onto wireless router
reset this to 192.168.1.100 (up out of the way)
(also reserved dhcp addresses 192.168.1.150-199)
log on again to wireless router - works ok

Yes Shaun, all currently wired connections, cables seem ok, using main lan 
ports NOT wan port.

Many thanks to Roger & Shaun - now to play some more with the wan port and the 
wireless settings . . . . 

Roger G.



> Without knowing what's within the scope of the 
> configuration tools you have, it's hard to know which to recommend.
> However, I had a very similar problem: my lan was configured around
> 193.168.1.x and then bought a WAP that came with a default ip of
> 192.168.2.1 ...
>
> Step one was to give one of the machines another 192.168.2.x ip, so I
> could access the WAP's configuration page.  Step 2 was to reset the
> WAP's ip to 193.168.1.y - whereupon I lost contact.  Resetting the
> machine used to control the WAP to its original, 192.168.1.x ip, got me
> back in contact and then things went OK.
>
> Another issue was that at home I was using 192.168.1.x but the net at
> work was using 192.168.0.x  I finally discovered that my laptop had some
> quite neat reconfiguration software, but doing it manually, the key had
> been to widen the mask (less than 255.255.255.0) so that I could get
> access to a wider range of subnet.
>
> I hope that's coherent enough (though given the hour and the empty
> bottle it may not be), but if not, feel free to mail me off-list.
>
> Roger

-- 
Ten years of rejection slips is nature's way of telling you to stop
writing.
		-- R. Geis