New Member
•
4 Messages
Cascade Instructions (LAN to WAN) for AT&T Fiber BGW320-505 To Second Router With Public Static IP Block
I'd like to cascade the BGW320 into my other router that's set up behind it, including managing a block of public static IPs I got. My understanding of what I'm trying to accomplish is to make the BGW320 as hands-off as possible so that the UDMP can manage the firewall and all traffic. I can find instructions for IP passthrough and other bits and pieces of things I need to consider. But I think the public static IP block adds a layer of complication. I've read that I should NOT do IP Passthrough and instead do the cascading thing. Again, I'm not sure and nothing walks me through the entire process that I can follow. I'm new to this stuff and I'm hoping someone can dumb it down enough for me to understand.
Here's what my setup looks like right now:
AT&T Fiber Internet --> BGW320-505 --> Unifi Dream Machine Pro (UDMP) <-- All other devices
- Nothing else is connected to the BGW320 aside from the UDMP (LAN to WAN). That is, an RJ-45 cable is plugged into one of the BGW320's ethernet ports, and the other end is plugged into the "internet" port of the UDMP.
- The only adjustments I made so far is to disable the BGW320 wifi so as to not interfere with the UDMP wifi access points.
- As mentioned, I bought a block of 5 usable static public IPs from AT&T. But I'm not sure how to utilize these. The info the AT&T tech provided looks like:
- Gateway IP XX.XX.XX.206
- Subnet Mask XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX
- IP Range XX.XX.XX.201 --> XX.XX.XX.205
If your network is working fine why do you want to do any of this?
I'm going down this road because I was trying to set up a Plex server. I ran into a "double NAT" issue and nobody outside my home network can access my Plex server. I think the double NAT issue will be resolved by cascading the routers.
Why did you buy public static IPs?
Also because of the Plex server. I thought these were needed to facilitate connecting to the server and that one of these static IPs would be assigned to it. Clearly I'm confused about this. I got it in my head that the UDMP would get one of the public static IPs and then the Plex server gets another one? Or maybe I'm supposed to assign static public IPs to all three devices in question (BGW320, UDMP, Plex server)? I'm really not sure. Currently the Plex server is connected to the UDMP like any other device.
What is your Plex server?
I bought a Synology DS920+ NAS. It has a built in OS that can install Plex onto itself. Setting up the hardware was fairly easy. And like I said, devices within my network have no problems streaming from the Plex server right now. External connections -- say, a friend with the Plex app on their TV -- can see my Plex libraries on their side but cannot stream anything. Ultimately this is what I'm hoping to resolve.
Thanks in advance for any help offered. Let me know if there's any other info or screenshots or pictures I can provide. I'm outside my comfort zone here but am very excited to learn how to do all this.
blakkheartt
New Member
•
2 Messages
2 years ago
@JefferMC Hi, I was wondering if you could help me out. I just purchased a QNAP QHora-201W. I have the BGW320 and I purchased a block of static IPs. I currently have an Eero Pro, a Trendnet tew-8f29dru, and 3 switches. Here is what I would like to do. I want to have the QNAP be the router to control all the data, VPN, firewall, DHCP etc. I want the eero and trendnet to just pass data and wifi. I have a server (dual Xeon with 256 GB of ram) that I want to establish as an SFTP server with a static IP, and also set up a VM to create a media cloud server with its own static IP. Would I just assign the static IPs to those devices, via the QNAP? Also, could I have the QNAP use one of the static IPs?
I'm kind of lost on how to do this. I know I will need to put the eero and trendnet in bridge mode. The Att router and QNAP are down in the basement. I have an unmanaged switch on the second floor that will connect to the QNAP router. A pc, the server, another unmanaged switch, and the trendnet will be hardwired to that switch. The erro is on the 3rd floor and is connected to a switch and provides wifi on that floor. I do not want the ATT device to do any work.
Hopefully, I made sense. I'm new to all this so any help will be appreciated.
Thank you.
(edited)
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
33.1K Messages
2 years ago
Having the QNAP handle a device behind it with a public IP address, and also having the QNAP handle NAT operations for a bunch of clients with private addresses may be a struggle for the QNAP. I know nothing about the capabilities and how to configure the QNAP, so I cannot guide you there, and that will be the hard part. If you can get that done, then configuring the Gateway would be fairly simply (IP Passthrough to pass the public dynamic for the NAT to the QNAP, then cascaded router to 0.0.0.0 to send the public block there).
If you can connect your SFTP server directly to the Gateway, then you could give it one static IP address. Creating a VM inside it with another static IP address would only be possible if the server has two ethernet cards and you connect both to the Gateway (directly, or via switch). For this, you would not use cascaded router, but instead use the Public Subnet setting (the two are mutually exclusive).
Otherwise, yes, connect your Wi-Fi gear in AP/Bridge mode to the QNAP.
0
0
blakkheartt
New Member
•
2 Messages
2 years ago
@JefferMC
Thanks for the response. The server has 2 10gigabit ports and 6 1gigabit ports. I will look into how to set up the QNAP. Never used them before but it received good reviews and had a decent price that provided 10gigabit ports.
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
33.1K Messages
2 years ago
The reason I mentioned multiple Ethernet ports is that normally there is a one-IP to MAC address restriction, so if you tried to configure multiple IP addresses to a single physical interface, the Gateway won't handle it.
0
0
Mari34
New Member
•
3 Messages
2 years ago
This has been a really useful thread. Can I use a similar approach to set up a test environment, to test out my OPNsense router, while still maintaining a live environment running. I could cascade my static ip to to my OPNsense router and use passthrough for my current environment?
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
33.1K Messages
2 years ago
Yes, using Cascade to pass the Public Static block to one router, while leaving IP Passthrough to a different router is fine.
0
Mari34
New Member
•
3 Messages
2 years ago
@jefferMC
So I have been working to set this up, but came upon another thread
BGW320-500 Cascated Router Mode: not working with static IP blocks
and near the end of that thread, which is more current than this one, you implied that passthrough and cascade were extremely hard to get to work together. If that is truly the case do I have any other options for having a production environment and test environment both running? If not I guess I'm wasting my money on static ip addresses.
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
33.1K Messages
2 years ago
They are... ON THE SAME ROUTER.
When on two different routers, I see no problem. That's what you asked earlier.
0
0
Mari34
New Member
•
3 Messages
2 years ago
Ok, great, must have misread the other post. Thanks for the quick response.
0
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
33.1K Messages
2 years ago
Again, the issue is that most consumer routers have no idea how to simultaneously:
1) Provide NAT to one public address for one set of private IP addresses, and
2) Provide routing for a different set of public addresses, either directly assigned public addresses or NAT.
The Gateway can be configured to expect a router to do this. I don't know whether it actually works properly, because I don't know of anyone who could get a router configured properly to find out.
The Gateway can easily be configured to have IP Passthrough on one Router and Cascaded Router on another. Or to have IP Passthrough to one router, and have a public subnet on its LAN and just assign one of those public addresses to the WAN address of the second router (which is usually simpler and several people have done this).
(edited)
0
0