On 2016-05-09 15:05, sdm wrote:

On 05/09/2016 06:01 AM, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Let's see your routing table on 192.168.1.4: "ip route show".

Here you go:

# > ip route show default via 192.168.1.1 dev enp7s0 192.168.1.0/24 dev enp7s0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.4

Also "ip address show", please. Can you ping the computers from the routers? -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

sdm wrote:

On 05/09/2016 06:42 AM, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Okay, looks good. I guess the two PCs connected to a switch (in your router)?

It's a D-Link router running DD-WRT, so I guess you can call it a switch.

Usually when you have a number of ports, they're running as a switch or hub, with one port for the uplink. I guess both your PCs are open for ICMP echos? (silly question, I know).

Both of my SUSE wired PC's are connected directly to it. I'm confident that hypothetically, if each PC was connected via wired ethernet to an individual DD-WRT client bridge router (1 client bridge router per PC) there would be no problem with those 2 PC's talking with each other, pinging, sharing files, etc. But here there's a situation where 2 wired ethernet computers are both connected to the switch, and then that traffic is routed to the master router via wireless link and back via wireless, and then routed out through the wired ports. I think it has something to do with the routing table and modifying the advanced routing table in the client bridge router to do what I'm trying to do, but that is just a guess.

What is this "client bridged router"? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2016-05-09 15:55, sdm wrote:

On 05/09/2016 06:38 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Also "ip address show", please.

Can you ping the computers from the routers?

# ip address show

Looks good.

I tried pinging the PC's from the router and all was successful; 0% loss.

So there is connectivity. From one side.

On 05/09/2016 06:42 AM, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Okay, looks good. I guess the two PCs connected to a switch (in your router)?

It's a D-Link router running DD-WRT, so I guess you can call it a switch. Both of my SUSE wired PC's are connected directly to it. I'm confident that hypothetically, if each PC was connected via wired ethernet to an individual DD-WRT client bridge router (1 client bridge router per PC) there would be no problem with those 2 PC's talking with each other, pinging, sharing files, etc. But here there's a situation where 2 wired ethernet computers are both connected to the switch, and then that traffic is routed to the master router via wireless link and back via wireless, and then routed out through the wired ports. I think it has something to do with the routing table and modifying the advanced routing table in the client bridge router to do what I'm trying to do, but that is just a guess.

Maybe the problem is first understanding what a "client bridge router" is. Most "home" routers have a 4 port integrated switch on the LAN side. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

On 2016-05-09 16:32, sdm wrote:

...

Maybe the problem is first understanding what a "client bridge router" is.

Most "home" routers have a 4 port integrated switch on the LAN side. As does this one, but it's sending and receiving traffic out the wired

On 05/09/2016 07:19 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote: ports, as well as sending and receiving traffic via a wireless bridge to the master router. You are familiar with WDS, right? Client Bridge is the same idea. I think it used to be called Wireless repeater mode in previous DD-WRT releases, and now it's Client Bridge Mode. So, are we on the same page now?

Not much... I think I understand, but... do you have a link? The problem is in that thing, IMO. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

Am Montag 09 Mai 2016, 07:32:52 schrieb sdm:

On 05/09/2016 07:19 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

Maybe the problem is first understanding what a "client bridge router" is.

Most "home" routers have a 4 port integrated switch on the LAN side.

As does this one, but it's sending and receiving traffic out the wired ports, as well as sending and receiving traffic via a wireless bridge to the master router. You are familiar with WDS, right? Client Bridge is the same idea. I think it used to be called Wireless repeater mode in previous DD-WRT releases, and now it's Client Bridge Mode. So, are we on the same page now?

These days most Wifi access points have a feature that most call "client isolation", which means that two client devices connected to the same access point can not reach each other. Maybe your master AP has this turned on, and it "extends" onto the devices connected to your client bridge? Cheers MH -- gpg key fingerprint: 5F64 4C92 9B77 DE37 D184 C5F9 B013 44E7 27BD 763C -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 05/09/2016 08:11 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

I'm very much guessing you have a bug in Client Bridge software. A few questions:

- Can WLAN connected devices connected wirelessly to the main router ping each outer? Can they ping the openSUSE boxes?

Yes, and they also were able to ping both openSUSE boxes. I have another router that is also in Client Bridge Mode -- that is 2 routers in Client Bridge Mode for the record, and 1 master router for a total of 3 routers on the network at the moment. If I connect a Windows laptop to the other client bridge router which is *not* the same client bridge router which I have both openSUSE boxes connected to, I can ping both openSUSE boxes. If I plug that same Windows laptop into the third ethernet port on the client bridge router both openSUSE boxes are connected to, absolutely nothing as far as those three computers pinging each other or seeing each other. Internet works fine, I can access pages at full speed and access the GUI admin pages for all three routers on the network. Currently I'm trying Client Mode instead of Client Bridge Mode which now puts both SuSE boxes on a different subnet and I experience the same exact problem. As per my earlier email in regards to the naming being switched around in newer DD-WRT releases as to what each wireless mode, "Repeater" is now called "Client" and "Repeater Bridge" is now called "Client Bridge" ** * *Repeater https://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Repeater* A) DHCP & NAT enabled B) Clients on different subnet from primary router. C) Computers connected to one router cannot see computers connected to other routers in Windows Network. * *Repeater Bridge https://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Repeater_Bridge* A) Wireless Repeater capabilities with DHCP & NAT disabled. B) Clients on the same subnet as primary router. C) All computers can see one another in Windows Network. * *Universal Wireless Repeater https://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Repeater_Bridge* Uses a program/script called AutoAP to keep wireless connection with the nearest/optimal host Access Point. On 05/09/2016 08:11 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

- If you have multiple SSIDs, can, WLAN devices directly using the same SSID as the client bridge ping each other. I only have 1 SSID and the Client Bridge router is set to the same SSID as the master router. It sounds like you are talking about creating a VAP on the client bridge router (virtual access point) and second SSID, but I haven't tried that yet, although I am assuming I'll run into the same routing problem.

On 05/09/2016 08:11 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

- Can either of the boxes connected to the client bridged router ping the Internet. (ping yahoo.com). Can they ping other WLAN connected boxes? Can they ping the openSUSE boxes?

Yes, both openSUSE boxes ping yahoo.com just fine. They can also ping my laptop which is connected via wireless to the master router. Where the problem is is when I try pinging one openSUSE box from my other openSUSE box: #ping 192.168.0.3 PING 192.168.0.3 (192.168.0.3) 56(84) bytes of data. From 192.168.0.2 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.2 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.2 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.0.2 icmp_seq=4 Destination Host Unreachable On 05/09/2016 08:11 AM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

My understanding of the client bridge function is:

* openSUSE Box1 => IGMP (ping) packet to local router via Ethernet

* local router forwards IGMP packet via wireless to main router

* main router forwards IGMP packet back to local router (via wireless)

* local router forwards IGMP packet to openSUSE Box2 via Ethernet

My guess is either:

- the main router doesn't allow peer-to-peer packets at all between it's WLAN connected devices. That should be fixable via a config change in the main router.

I have intentionally setup WLANs to not allow peer-to-peer connections. The clients are only allowed to access the Internet. Mostly done with guest SSIDs.

- the main router has a bug that doesn't properly handle peer-to-peer connections on the bridged client router.

I say it is a bug because I have setup up bridged clients where a printer was hardwired to the slave router. I was able to use the printer from WLAN connected clients regardless of which WLAN router they were connected to.

I also checked AP isolation on the master router and client bridge router and both are on off. So yes, it very well could be a bug, or something with the config that I haven't yet figured out. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2016-05-09 17:11, Greg Freemyer wrote:

My understanding of the client bridge function is:

* openSUSE Box1 => IGMP (ping) packet to local router via Ethernet

* local router forwards IGMP packet via wireless to main router

* main router forwards IGMP packet back to local router (via wireless)

* local router forwards IGMP packet to openSUSE Box2 via Ethernet

But in this case, the 4 mouths on that thing (client bridge) are not acting as switch. They are all "routing", isolated from one another. I had no idea this could be possible.

My guess is either:

- the main router doesn't allow peer-to-peer packets at all between it's WLAN connected devices. That should be fixable via a config change in the main router.

I have intentionally setup WLANs to not allow peer-to-peer connections. The clients are only allowed to access the Internet. Mostly done with guest SSIDs.

- the main router has a bug that doesn't properly handle peer-to-peer connections on the bridged client router.

The main router would ignore the packets, because it would assume the switch would handle them, much nearer to the source. It is, IMHO, a waste of wireless bandwidth to send packets up, then down, instead of traversing the switch in cable. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

On 2016-05-09 21:43, Greg Freemyer wrote:

On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:

...

The main router would ignore the packets, because it would assume the switch would handle them, much nearer to the source. It is, IMHO, a waste of wireless bandwidth to send packets up, then down, instead of traversing the switch in cable.

It is my understanding that is exactly what "bridge mode" means.

The client device is saying I'm leaving it to the main router to make all decisions. I'm just a dumb box that leaves all decisions to the main router.

Ahhh! I see.

It could well be that the main box is saying: "Surely the dumb client is handling all peer-to-peer communications, so I won't send it right back to where it came from."

Yes, I agree. What would be the interest to handle all on the main router? Delegating traffic (not necessarily the decisions) would allow much faster traffic (because the cable typically has more bandwidth).

Thus the bug. The bridge client is sending all inbound packets to the main router, but the main router is assuming it already peeled of the local only packets.

Bug or misunderstanding. Ie, misconfiguration.

No real idea on my part, but seems like an easy way for a incompatibility to be introduced, especially if the boxes are from different manufacturers.

Mmmm... aren't both running open router firmware? -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

On 2016-05-10 14:16, Anton Aylward wrote:

On 05/09/2016 02:13 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

But in this case, the 4 mouths on that thing (client bridge) are not acting as switch. They are all "routing", isolated from one another. I had no idea this could be possible.

With software, anything is possible.

Absolutely. But I thought that the switches ran in hardware for speed. Lower level, not really tcp/ip. Obviously I was wrong, they run in firmware, aka software, thus modifiable. ...

The router, sdm says, is running DD-WRT. If that's not a few steps above the idiot simple software shipped on home-grade routers I don't know what is! {Thinks: I need to flash my own router with that someday}

I did, on one of mine. An ADSL router provided by an ISP. I repurposed it as a new wifi access point. Good news: it works, and I hear no complains. Bad news: it was hell setting it up. The web configuration part crashed often, apparently for lack of memory. I had to use an old version, because the new one failed to load at all the web. At least the old one worked somewhat, horribly slow (half an hour for a command, say), provided I did not try to use certain pages. I had to do the rest of the configuration by telnet or ssh, and it is a very complex command set unless you have a good guide. The web is far easier, but if failed. The notes for my router did not warn that the new firmware needed more memory than whatever the router has. I had to ask for help on a forum or mail list, and they were not very helpful. Thus I hesitate to try another device that I use for similar purpose (AP), but with the original buggy firmware. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

On 2016-05-10 15:15, Anton Aylward wrote:

On 05/10/2016 08:58 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On 2016-05-10 14:16, Anton Aylward wrote:

...

On 05/09/2016 02:13 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

But in this case, the 4 mouths on that thing (client bridge) are not acting as switch. They are all "routing", isolated from one another. I had no idea this could be possible.

With software, anything is possible.

Absolutely. But I thought that the switches ran in hardware for speed.

LOL! Cisco, Wellfleet and others and others have built their businesses on making the switches software controllable and "feature rich".

But the original firmware of these routers do not allow that fine control.

...

...

DD-WRT.

...

I did, on one of mine. An ADSL router provided by an ISP. I repurposed it as a new wifi access point. Good news: it works, and I hear no complains. Bad news: it was hell setting it up.

That's the problem with anything 'feature rich'. The only reason so many of us can deal with something as 'fasture rich' as Linux, KDE, Gnome and more is that we * compartmentalise * Linux is about patterns rather than 'sui generis' * have been doing it a long time

Well, but the firmware on the router is not modular, but a single block. Like a Linux CD live. There are no choices, it is either all or none.

...

The web configuration part crashed often, apparently for lack of memory.

Well, yes there is that. Upgrading memory in a router is not as easy as in a PC or laptop :-( Even those of us with a steady hand when wielding the soldering iron my be stymied by the circuit design being limited.

I would not go that road. Instead, I would have bought a dedicated WiFi AP instead of buying memory. Yes, I can solder, but SMDs are not that easy.

...

Thus I hesitate to try another device that I use for similar purpose (AP), but with the original buggy firmware.

If I had the time and inclination ... well I keep seeing old WRT54 devices at thrift stores now that the newer, faster more integrated cable models from ISPs for home users offer wifi connectivity as well and the separate wifi router is made redundant. At under C$5, often under C$2.50, that is low risk. Its just, as you point out, the time ...

My entry router has integrated WiFI, but I disabled it due to bad quality. I simply reused another router that was gathering dust as a new WiFi AP. This is working fine, but there are some improper settings that I can not change; thus reflashing is an alternative. But I hesitate a lot. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)

On 05/09/2016 07:31 AM, Malcolm wrote:

I'm running dd-wrt v3.0-r29519 on a Linksys WRT54G and also a Linksys E1200 one is a bridge the other an AP, both work fine either via wireless and multiple pc's connected to the bridge in 'repeater' not client.

On advanced routing the Operating Mode is Router and the Dynamic Routing is set to LAN & WAN.

You mean Client Bridge, not "Client Mode", correct? Repeater option is gone, it's now been renamed to Client Bridge from Repeater Bridge. The client bridge router on my netowrk also is in Router mode and Dynamic Routing is set to LAN & WAN. And still, no computers connected to the CBR can ping each other, whether they're Windows machines or SuSE boxes. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

sdm wrote:

On 05/09/2016 06:01 AM, Per Jessen wrote:

...

sdm wrote:

...

I have 2 wired ethernet PC's connected to a DD-WRT router running in client bridge mode. Both have internet access just fine, and both can access the main router's GUI administration page. Any PC connected wirelessly to the main router can also access the client bridge router's admin page as well. The problem I'm running into, is that the 2 wired PC's can't talk to each other. Pings fail when trying to access either PC; I've tried it on both:

PING 192.168.1.5 (192.168.1.5) 56(84) bytes of data. From 192.168.1.4 icmp_seq=1 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.1.4 icmp_seq=2 Destination Host Unreachable From 192.168.1.4 icmp_seq=3 Destination Host Unreachable Let's see your routing table on 192.168.1.4: "ip route show".

Here you go:

# > ip route show default via 192.168.1.1 dev enp7s0 192.168.1.0/24 dev enp7s0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.1.4

Okay, looks good. I guess the two PCs connected to a switch (in your router)? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.0°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org