VectorLinux
October 21, 2014, 08:26:00 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Visit our home page for VL info. To search the old message board go to http://vectorlinux.com/forum1. The first VL forum is temporarily offline until we can find a host for it. Thanks for your patience.
 
Now powered by KnowledgeDex.
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Please support VectorLinux!
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: cascading routers?  (Read 4616 times)
Daniel
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 704


WWW
« on: April 14, 2010, 01:42:43 pm »

I have a router hooked up as a "sub-router" to the main router in order to be able to connect devices to more than the 4 ethernet ports on the main router. Right now, any devices on the "sub-router" can see the network (shared files/folders and such) but the devices on the main router can't see anything on the sub-router. I have heard about a solution called "cascading" the routers such that the main router knows that the sub-router is actually a router and not a computer or other such device. Does anyone know how to do this? what kinds of values and stuff to change on the routers or something?
Logged

The following sentence is true. The previous sentence is false.

VL 6.0 SOHO KDE-Classic on 2.3 Ghz Dual-core AMD with 3 Gigs of RAM
Daniel
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 704


WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 14, 2010, 05:33:30 pm »

Never mind, found it. I just had to turn off the dhcp server on the sub-router and move the cable from the main router into one of the lan ports, not the "internet" port on the sub-router.
Logged

The following sentence is true. The previous sentence is false.

VL 6.0 SOHO KDE-Classic on 2.3 Ghz Dual-core AMD with 3 Gigs of RAM
toothandnail
Tester
Vectorian
****
Posts: 2527


« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2010, 08:23:19 pm »

Never mind, found it. I just had to turn off the dhcp server on the sub-router and move the cable from the main router into one of the lan ports, not the "internet" port on the sub-router.

You would probably have been better off with a network switch rather than a second router - cheaper too....

Paul.
Logged
Daniel
Packager
Vectorian
****
Posts: 704


WWW
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2010, 06:44:31 am »

Yeah, but I just had this router laying around. It used to be the main router but the wireless quit working so it got replaced.
Logged

The following sentence is true. The previous sentence is false.

VL 6.0 SOHO KDE-Classic on 2.3 Ghz Dual-core AMD with 3 Gigs of RAM
MikeCindi
Tester
Vectorian
****
Posts: 1073


« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2010, 11:30:09 am »

You could probably disable any firewall features on the sub-router so that incoming requests are not blocked. This would free up the other lan socket being used to connect to the main router.
Logged

The plans of the diligent lead to profit...Pro. 21:5
VL64 7.1b3                                     RLU 486143
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!