0

i just addes a fw to my network. it manages 2 WAN using load balancing.enter image description here

a router i reached to configure, while the other no. in my netgear router i reset all settings, disabled NAT, imposed IPoA, disabled DHCP and no other things (let blank IP, mask and gate fields). in fw i configured IP, Mask and Gate as my ISP told me. can you help me?

Andrea
  • 3
  • 7
  • I can't help you because I don't understand your problem. You need to explain much more, give more details, and especially you need to explain what is not working. You should probably consult your ISP. – Law29 May 21 '16 at 10:43
  • the problem is that i can't surfing internet. i used the same procedure that i used in the router 1 (NAT off, ISP settings set only in fw and not in router). i can't understand the problem. i should look for a "transparent mode" of router but i can't see it in my DG834 settings – Andrea May 21 '16 at 16:56

1 Answers1

0

If I understand correctly, going from your reply to my comment: you have two WAN uplinks, each with a router, you have bought a double-uplink firewall to manage both WANs, your ISP has told you to put the two routers into transparent mode, you have done this for one of them, and it works. If it works, you should be able to surf the Internet using that one. If you turn off the one that works and you cannot surf any more, then you have proved you have a problem with the second one, which is a DG834.

The usual name for transparent mode is "bridged mode", and that is the name used by Netgear. The Netgear site seems to find that putting the equipment into bridged mode is so easy that it doesn't need any explanation, so hopefully you'll be able to take it from there.

Law29
  • 3,557
  • 1
  • 16
  • 28
  • hi, I did not found the correct way to go into "bridge mode", but after a search i found that it is not to obvious: [link](http://blog.crox.net/archives/40-Netgear-DG834-bridge-mode-PPPoE.html). This evening i will try. NAT will be automatically disabled? – Andrea May 23 '16 at 06:03
  • In bridge mode, yes, NAT is disabled. The two are incompatible. – Law29 May 23 '16 at 06:07
  • ok i set the router in "bridge mode" and, as first proof, i tried to configure the pc with my ISP IPs. [link](http://i.imgur.com/mrBGwMs.png). The configuration does not works. – Andrea May 23 '16 at 06:37
  • If your WAN link is PPP over ADSL you may need a login and password for the PPP tunnel. This is really a problem for your ISP. – Law29 May 23 '16 at 06:45
  • i have IPoA, the simplest way i think. have i to ask my ISP? – Andrea May 23 '16 at 07:05
  • Sorry, you did mention IPoA in your question. If that is what your ISP told you to use, then yes of course that is what you should use, but it's not really a question of "simple"; the configuration on your side needs to correspond to what your ISP has configured on the other end. IPoA with a bridging modem should as you say be very simple to configure on the firewall, just static IP, netmask, and default gateway. – Law29 May 23 '16 at 12:24
  • i just do that but it does not work. now i opened a ticket with my ISP and i'm waiting. the strange thing is that with double NAT activated it worked but i had my fw login page public, and i received many intrusion attemps... – Andrea May 23 '16 at 18:07
  • I don't see how that could be possible. If the NAT router is between your firewall and Internet, then Internet should not be able to access your firewall. – Law29 May 23 '16 at 20:13
  • maybe because i put this router on 192.168.1.1 while my local LAN is on 192.168.0.0/24? – Andrea May 24 '16 at 19:32
  • Having different local (192.168.x.x) addresses shouldn't make intrusion attempts any more possible, but I wonder what exactly those intrusion attempts were. You really need help from a computer technician who will look at and test everything, separately and together, to see what exactly is working, what is not, why, and to correct things. – Law29 May 24 '16 at 20:54