Cisco Switching/Routing :: Setup WET200 As Wired Bridge?
Oct 8, 2012
I have two separate offices in the same building that I'm trying to connect. They are physically far apart so I cannot connect them wirelessly. I have had an ethernet cable run from the main office to the second office and physically connected it to a WET200. I can see the WET200 on my router in the main office. In the second office, I want clients to be able to come in and connect wirelessly to the WET200 which will then connect them to my router and internet connection. The WET200 is the correct device for this?
I've just purchased 2 WET200 wireless bridges for our organisation, with the intention of using them to create a wireless bridge between 2 buildings.I've followed this guide here: url...and I'm unable to configure any kind of security other than WEP. More disconcertingly, the foot of that guide states:WET200 only supports WEP for the Wireless Security."Surely this can't be the case? All the marketing blurb states clearly that the WET200 supports WPA2, and I would have thought WPA2 was a given for any wireless product sold today, especially a business grade product. Have I misunderstood what this device can do?
I'm looking to bring up a wireless bridge between 2 WET200.I've set in Wireless -> Basic Settings and Wireless -> Security the same parameters in both devices, but it fails.
I just purchased a WET200 wireless bridge. After trying a very long password for an enterprise certificate the bridge restarted and I have not been able to contact the device with the default 192.168.1.226 ip address. I have tried performing a reset even by holding the reset button in for a minute. The bridge will not ping either. I do have a power light and the wireless light flashes and the Ethernet port lights function when plugged into my laptop.
i am placing a formal request to Cisco and to the firmware development team to create a new-and-improved firmware release for the WET200 wireless Ethernet bridge, a product that is still being produced, shipped, and sold. I purchased the product about one-and-a-half years ago and have enjoyed its performance. There have been, however, some flaws with the device, namely the following:While configured to use WPA2-based security, DHCP-related traffic is not passed from a router/gateway's DHCP Server to connected devices on the WET200. Current firmware release notes indicate this was a known issue and was, supposedly, fixed; however, due to the level of problems customers are reporting, it appears this may have only been resolved, if at all, with security configurations of WPA, WEP, or OPEN. It has not been fixed for customers using WPA2-based security.When I originally purchased the WET200 and configured it to use WPA2-based security, while it, initially, did have a few problems connecting to my router/gateway, it, eventually, did connect and stayed connected for, approximately, one year. However, in September of 2009, it suddenly lost connectivity with my router/gateway and has not been able to establish a connection since, even after reinstalling the latest firmware revision and after several soft and hard resets of the device. I tested the WET200 with another router/gateway, only to experience the same issue. Other devices are connecting to my router/gateway, but, not the WET200. The last firmware update for the WET200 was dated back in July of 2008. Currently, it is January 2010 and since these issues have been known for quite some time, it is unacceptable that the firmware for this device has not been updated in such a long time, especially when there are known issues with the WET200's firmware. Such lack of support is forcing me and my clients to stop using these Cisco-based products and purchase competing hardware, something I would prefer not to do; however, without better support, I and my clients do not have a choice. Expecting me and my clients to use an inferior form of security on the WET200, such as WEP and/or WPA, until a firmware update is issued is unacceptable, especially when that update has not been released in over one-and-a-half years. Such lack of support is especially unforgettable when my clients and I are looking to purchase new networking equipment. In the past, I would not have hesitated to purchase a Cisco-based product; now, with this experience in mind, I am finding it very difficult to recommend to a client that he or she should invest their organization's finances into Cisco-branded equipment. Proper, professional, timely, support of your hardware is expected of your customers, especially if you wish them to remain loyal customers. I have noticed that other similar devices, albeit, higher-end devices, have had their firmware updated, more recently, compared to the WET200. I assumed this meant that the firmware development team was updating all firmware on such devices. So far, I have been disappointed in the lack of firmware updates for the WET200. While I understand the possible desire to update the higher-end products, first, as a professional whose job is to research, recommend, purchase, install,configure, secure, and maintain both the enterprise-level and small business-level devices, I highly encourage Cisco not to overlook their small business products when the firmware development team is updating firmware for any Cisco products. Deficiency in the support of one strata of Cisco-based products is reflective upon the support of any Cisco-based product and is not easily forgiven by Cisco customers, such as myself, when new and additional hardware needs to be purchased.
I'm looking to bring up a wireless bridge between 2 WET200.I've set in Wireless -> Basic Settings and Wireless -> Security the same parameters in both devices, but it fails. [code]
I need to replace an ADSL modem and have a spare 857W. Can I use this to act as a simple bridge between the ADSL PPPoA connection and the FW WAN port?
[ CISCO 857W ] ISP - PPPoA - BRIDGE - FW WAN
I have a block of Public IP's so the PPPoA Dialer 0 connection would get x.x.x.185/29 I would like to bridge this directly to the FW WAN port and set that to x.x.x.185/29 with a gateway of x.x.x.186/32.Currently I am using it in router mode with no NAT or FW and am losing a Public IP as I need to set the FW WAN as x.x.x.186 with a GW of x.x.x.185 I am setting BVI 1 as x.x.x.185/29 and Dialer0 as IP Unnumbered BVI 1.
I need to set up a L2 llink between my LAN and this 1921 router. I though IRB would do it but its not working yet. Here is the topology- I dont want to see another hop on this 1921 rtr so I hope I can just trunk it or something with IRB. Not working.
We have a WIRED network and a WIRELESS network at work. I start downloading a big file over the wireless network. I realize that it is slow, half way thru the processs there any way, I can set up the network, such that, DURING the file transfer process, I can switch from wireless to wired, without any disruption?...
I have 3750 core/distribution switches with routing enabled in two offices connected with copper link and L3 port channel interfaces. NewOffice#2 has moved about 5 miles farther away from office#1 and I have to deploy new core/distribution switch connect it to old core#2 via F.O and move all access switches with it. Old core will stay in old #2 offices as a bridge between office#1 and new office#2 Office#1core<->copper (Ethernet) <->oldoffice#2core<->f.o. <->new office#2core How I should configure port channels ports on oldoffice#2 core to act as bridge between office#1 core/dist and newoffice#2 core/dist without changing anything else (ip, etc) on whole network
I have 3 VLANs here that need to be on the same network segment. They are going to be used by our Wi-Fi network (with Aironet APs), bound to 3 different SSIDs (as Aironet APs doesnt allow multiple SSID per VLAN), each one with a different authentication method and server.Is there a way to bridge those VLANs together with a Catalyst 3750 switch? I tryed configuring an IP address on one of the VLAN interfaces, then configuring a bridge with the vlan-bridge protocol (Catalyst 3750 doesnt have the "ieee" bridge protocol type) and put all 3 VLAN interfaces on the same bridge-group, but it didnt work (even with "bridge x route ip").I also tryed configuring IRB bridging, with the 3 VLAN interfaces on the same bridge-group and an IP address on the BVI interface (the way I used to do with old 2600 routers). Same result.(actually, I didint test to see if the interfaces are actually being "bridged", but I see neither of them can reach the router)
In preparing for an upcoming upgrade of our serverswitches (N7K and N55K), I've run into a wellknown issue with ISSU and Bridge Assurance, where ISSU is not supported when, among other, BA is enabled.
My topology is quite simple (see attatched jpg). A pair of N7K's as distributionlayer switches running in vPC mode with BA between them. The N55K's are dualhomed across the two N7K's through vPC, but each N55K operate indvidually, that is vPC is not running between them. The jpg shows a simplified topology, but I have several N55K's attached.
During the deployment of this network, we enabled BA downstream towards the N55K. In hindsight, maybe I could have excluded this option, but currently it's in operation and is also hindering me in doing ISSU on my N55K's. Now, the easy solution would be to simply revert to normal span-type mode and since the N55K is running LaCP upstream towards the N7K's, we've managed to stay clear of STP's shortcomings, so I believe I'm good even without BA.
Unfortunately, I don't have sufficient equipment at my disposal to set up a lab and test the impact of disabling BA between the N7Ks and N55Ks in a running enviroment. And since our server/application enviroment is somewhat fragile (that's putting it mildly), I'm trying to come up with an educated guess as to what impact to expect, if I concurrently (or as close as a manual intervention can get) re-configure the two ends of the channel to use span-type normal. I would expect the upstream port on the N55K (channel-port) to temporarily be suspended and having to go through the usual rstp cycle on both ends before coming operational again.
We have a 6513 with about 8 switches in it. I installed a Intel Pro PT NIC in a Dell PE2850 and setup the Team setting which created a bridge in the network connections.
10 minutes later, every server connected on that 'blade' went down and rebooted.
This happened once before to another tech here (I didn't know at the time it would do this but after he saw it he pointed it out)
I have a win7 system next to a smart TV. The win7 is connected to my network through wireless. A second port on the win7 is free.
I'd like to connect the smart TV using network cable to the free port, and set up a bridge so that it connects to the home network.
I tried using ICS. It workes only somewhat - I was able to get an IP address on the 192.168.137.x subnet, but the TV failed to connect to the gateway.
I am trying to use bridging to do the same. I configured the free port and the TV manually, to a 10.10.1.x network, and then I bridged the wireless and wired ports on the pc, (I modified the metric of the wireless to be lower than the wired port). This does not work either.
The goal is to make a 877W to work as a wireless client of dlink dir320 and brigde the LAN&WLAN so than the LAN clients of 877W could take DHCP from Dlink 320 directly.
I config vlans 21-23 on 3750 A and B switches.I config B switch to be Root Bridge for all vlansspanning-tree vlan 1,21-23, priority 4096 sh span tree on B switch 3750B# sh spanning-tree.
We have an environment where users create a lot of bridge loops. We have tried to send E-mails about it and educate the users but it is almost a lost cause at this point. The loops are created when users don’t pay attention and they plug a patch cable coming off of an access port up to ANOTHER access port by mistake.
All of our access ports are from 3750 stacked switches. The way we tried to deal with this in the beginning was with BPDUGuard and ERRDiable (BPDUGuard) auto recovery. We turned BPDUGuard on globally and left BPDUGuard auto recovery at the default value (I believe it was 30 seconds). so a loop would be detected and after 30 seconds, the switch would try to enable the port and if the loop still existed, close the port for 30 more seconds. Then we started having problems with printers getting "fried". Their NICs would die out and the control board would need to be replaced. After a lot of troubleshooting and testing, it was determined that allowing the ports to come out of ERRDisabled state would flood the network and the packets would generate in the millions per second range and fry the NIC of these printer.
The fix for this and saving the printers was terrible. We removed ERRDisable auto recovery and just let the ports that are looped stay in an ERRRDisabled state. We wait for the user to figure out the loop and try to use the port and then put in a work order. Then we physically visit the site and verify the port was shut (ERRDisabled) from a loop and we bounce the port (shut/no shut) and everything is resolved. I did lab tests with a switch looped and a printer on the switch and watched it fry. We have had no printers fry after we removed the auto recovery protocol at every location. Only the locations where loops existed and auto recovery protocol running were printers going bad. What I found during my lab tests was that each time the port was auto-recovered (yes, for that millisecond while it checks if a loop still exists), more packets were re-generated and eventually enough was re-broadcastthat printers would go down. We never had a problem with computer NICs. I guess the cheaper printer NICs couldn’t handle the broadcast storms created by this. I tried playing with the auto recovery timers and even the highest setting would eventually re-create these storms.
So my question is what best practices are others using? Should we get rid of BPDUGuard and just try to let spanning-tree handle these bridge loops? Is there something else I can try? I’m not CCNA by any means, just trying to do what I can in my environment. Manually visiting sites when loops occur is becoming more and more my job, though and I have plenty of other things to be doing.
I have two 6509s both with single FWSMs running in transparent mode with bridged Inside and Outside VLANs.I have my Core A set to STP priority of 8192 and Core B set to 16,384 to make Core A the root for all VLANs.Problem I have is when I look at spanning-tree on Core A for Inside VLAN 324 it states to get to the Root go via PO100 (Cost of 9) and that the Root also has a Priority of 8192, but as the designated Root has a lower MAC address it's pointing to the etherchannel. PO100 is L2 Etherchannel between the Cores.Moving accross PO100 to Core B and running the show spanning-tree command I can see that to get to the Root Bridge I need to go via PO272. PO272 is the internal Etherchannel to get to the FWSM on the Core B Switch. This shows a cost of 6 to get to the Root and a mac address of the Root Bridge which resides on Core A (Outside VLAN 124)To give some perspectibe,theoutside VLAN of the pair has it's STP ROOT on the Core A switch as intended?
I have an Extremely Old switch that I need to connect to my network. Because it is so old I don't want it to become the Root Switch.
what is the command to change the priority. (Honestly I don't remember if it has to be a lower number 1 or a higher number ). Always get that mixed up. I've read about root guard, but I would like to prevent it manually. (It is a small network after all)It is a Cisco 2950.
Is there a way to set up these ap's to bridge. Ie two buildings 100 yards apart Both buildings have wired clients into a Cisco poe switch. Want to plug the ap's into each switch and have them bridge the data and even better if they could trunk vlans. No wireless clients at all. Strictly a point to point bridge. Also will they need to be lwaps or standalone APs. If they are lwaps can I flash to standalone ?
config to setup PPPoE on the cisco 831 router to be used with a modem in bridge mode. I have tired other peoples configs found on the web but, not all the commands were available on the IOS version thats on the router. Also note that I bought this as a used router and I dont have a service contract so I am unable to download an updated IOS. The router ver is 12.3(7)T9 and the IOS is c831-k9o3sy6-mz.123-7.T9.bin. Running config below is last tried still could not connect or get ip address from isp. [code]
I've already done plenty of web search and gone through various forums. That's how I've gained knowledge of setting up wireless bridge. But for some unknown reasons I haven't been able to successfully pull it off. Let me explain.I have an ISP provided modem+wifi device. Its called PTCL Modem. I normally connect my laptop and other devices through its wifi. I need to extend the signals around my workplace. So I have bought a TP-Link wifi router (TL-WR740N). Both these devices support wireless bridging according to their admin settings. I'll go pic-by-pic to explain what steps I performed.Pic1: PTCL Modem wireless bridging options. It shows two options for AP Mode: Access Point and Wireless Bridge. And it shows three options for Bridge Restrict.
Pic2: TP-Link router home page Pic2a: I first change the TP-Link's IP Address, because the PTCL Modem's wireless is also using the same IP address (192.168.1.1) so the current address will conflict with it. I change the router's IP address to 192.168.2.1. It goes for a restart.Pic3: Next I turn off the DHCP Server, as suggested by various blogs and forums. Router goes for another reboot after saving this setting.Pic4: Now I go to Wireless Settings page and set Enable WDS on. It shows me bridging options.Pic5.
I click the Survey button and it shows me a list of wireless devices in its range along with their BSSID and Channel number. I select my PTCL Modem access point which is on Channel 6. My PTCL Modem's wireless is set to WPA2-PSK security with the password "********". I also set the Channel on my TP-Link router from Auto to 6, to come in line with PTCL Modem's wireless. Clicking Save makes router goes for another reboot.
I have a wired and wireless network setup at home with 2 PCs wired and 2 PCs using wireless via a Fritz!Box 7390. The 2 wireless PCs are a Media Centre PC connected to the TV and the other is my young sons PC. I have an old switch (10Mbs) that I would like to connect to the Ethernet port of the Media Centre PC and then run Cat5 to 2 Topfield PVRs so they can access the internet for updates.I know I have setup a bridge between the wireless connection and the wired but not totally sure what to do and how to get the switch setup.The Media Centre PC is running Windows 7 Home Premium SP1 and has a Belkin USB wireless tongle.
My client has a DSL modem and a Belkin wired 4-port router configured to connect to it using PPPoE. Apparently there is no way to configure the E2500 such that it may be dropped in as a direct replacement for the Belkin (which would also provide wireless access) without the PPPoE login/password (from the DSL provider, Verizon).
I would like to connect the "Internet" port of the E2500 to one of the Belkin's 4 ports, in order to use the E2500 for wireless internet access without using any of the 4 wired ports but I think this creates a NAT within an existing NAT network?
To avoid that if I configure the E2500 in wired bridge mode, it becomes transparent, and I can no longer access its administration interface using the address 192.168.1.1 (since that address belongs to the Belkin). How may I, for example, change the wireless password which the E2500 is in wired bridge mode?
I have the DIR-655, Rev. B running 2.07NA firmware, and have a strange problem with my wired clients. I have my primary computer/desktop PC connected via wired connection. I also have several wireless clients (laptop, iPad, iPhones, etc.). All have been performing normally. However, in December I connected a wired weather internet bridge to another ethernet port on the DIR-655.
It functions as it is supposed to, and all other connected devices do as well. But here's the problem - whenever I use the desktop PC (the only other wired connection) to do anything on the internet (mostly just web browsing ... I don't stream media from the internet on it, I don't do torrents....nothing out of the ordinary, and nothing really of high bandwidth), the wired weather bridge cannot communicate with its associated website. This continues as long as I'm using the desktop PC. When I stop using the desktop, the weather bridge resumes normally.
I have researched the weather bridge, and it is simply doing POST transactions (or so I'm told) to the website listening to it. It doesn't wait for acknowledgements or anything...just keeps POSTing updates. I tried reserving an IP for the weather bridge and the desktop, enabling QoS, and prioritizing the weather bridge (100 vs. desktop at 125), but it didn't work. I've tried moving the weather bridge into the DMZ. I'm totally baffled how just using the desktop to browse the internet could completely block the traffic from the weather bridge.
On the weather bridge support site, they suggested that I insure I'm not connected in gigabit speeds from my computer to the router, because in the past that has been known to cause issues on clients not running that speed, but I don't think my desktop is connected in that fashion. According to the settings, it can do 10 or 100, full or half. I have it set to AUTO.
I have a site that is very dense, but not high throughput. I have 4x48 port switches all 3560 and 1 2851 router. The switches are pretty much full to the brim but the site is never completly lit, they just like to move around a lot. However i wanted to provide this site with as much redundnace as possible. So my first thought was to build redundant pathing with the switches so that they could loose a switch and not have a single point of failure. So therefore I built a ring. SW1 to SW2, SW2 to SW3, SW3 to SW4, SW4 to SW1. To make this even more redundant against port hardware failure, i used two uplinks for each and built an etherchannel. is it good practice to use Etherchannel and Spanning Tree together?So i now have a good redundant LAN switching topology. I have multiple VLANs at the site so I am using Rapid-PVST. I did not set priorities on the switches as I don't think that is really truly necessary, but correct me if I am wrong!Ok so next step is to make sure that my WAN connection for all of these switches is redundant. I have a 2851 router, with 1 of the built in interfaces dedicated to our ethernet hand-off WAN connection (MPLS in this case using BGP routing). The other would be used as an uplink. I also got an additional card for the Router so that i can have redudant local LAN connections. I then built up some IRB bridges so that I could uplink the Router to SW1 and SW3. Is it good practice to use IRB Bridging on a Router to provide redundancy?So at this site i have the first part running, and it works pretty well but I have had 1 strage issue, which has to do with after a failure and re-convergence of spanning-tree, it seems that DHCP starts failing to work. I actually had to go into each of my switches make a dummy VLAN interface and put on helper-addresses to get them to work. They are not L3 switches (programatically speaking) so they should just forward the broadcast packet onto the router, which DOES have the helper-addresses programmed,Also at another site I have the bridge router setup configured, just without so many switches, and no etherchannel between the switches. This seems to work flawlessly, but the site is very small so performance issues would be difficult to spot since they are just thin-clients coming back to a Citrix server over a single T1.
I turned it on for bridging and it did not auto setup wireless so i need to turn off WPS but my wireless option page is now blank. I rebooted, reset the DAP but still no manual config option. I found I could configure it if I switched it to AP mode but still cannot setup from bridge mode. According to manual a reset does not turn off WPS so what is the answer?
I have a Cisco SG 300-20 as the core switch, layer 3. It is 192.168.4.6 on VLAN1 and 192.168.5.1 for VLAN2 (VOIP). All the ports are set in trunk mode. DHCP relay is setup on this switch.
The phones connected into a layer 2, Catalyst 2960-S switch. All ports are set in trunk mode. Default gateway on it is set to 192.168.5.1.
DHCP for both VLANs is provided by a Windows Server 2008 R2 server (the relay IP 192.168.4.15).
There is also an ASA 5510 in the mix which is 192.168.4.1. It has a route added to it for the 192.168.5.0 network to go to the SG 300 (192.168.5.1).
Just the two switches can ping each other on the 192.168.5.x network when I "add vlan 2" to the trunk port that is connected between the SG 300 and the 2960. The phones don't get DHCP on the 2960 switch. And I cannot ping 192.168.5.x from the ASA or anything else on the 192.168.4.x network.
After a bit of reading on intra-vlan routing for the SG 300 switch, I am thinking the SG 300 has to be the "center" of things so I need to make it 192.168.4.1 to be the gateway for both VLANs and change the ASA to 192.168.4.2 for VLAN1, etc. And I really can't do asymmetric routing with this switch.
I have a power conncet 6224 with routing enabled with several VLANs setup.VLAN Database: 6,8,10,90-254VLAN 6 is our management vlan10 is for our core network services (DNS, Domain, Exchange etc)90-254 are isolated vlans.What I need to accomplish is to prevent vlans 90-254 from communicating with each other and only allow communication to VLAN 10 and the internet. All internet firewall work will be handled by our Sonicwall. [code]
I'm trying to set up per vlan routing on a 3560G switch but it's not performing as I would expect. I've got a server on the 109 vlan with a 10.1.9.100 address and a default gateway of 10.1.9.1 this address is an HSRP gateway and currently resides on 10.1.9.7. When I traceroute through to my user PC on the internal network it receives a response from 10.1.9.7 However, it is then denied by an ACL on the internal firewall which has been applied to interface Eth0/0. It should arrive at the firewall on Eth0/2.109 as it has the 10.1.9.4 address.
My goal here is to route traffic on the 101 vlan to a seperate interface on the internal firewall from 109 vlan traffic. I'm either doing something wrong or these routing commands aren't designed to work in the way I'm expecting (I couldn't find any documentation on the ip route command where it is followed by different gateways for different vlans)
Internet through DSL-Thompson TG 789 VN router ---> several yards --> Linksys WRT320N --> wired computer netwerk | |with printer | | ---> Wireless Netwerk --> laptops / phones <--- (WAN depending on strongest signal) | ---> several servers
The Thompson does the DHCP and routing. It is the gateway through the internet, IP 192.168.2.254 (mask 255.255.255.0).I can't replace the thompson since it is delivered by my provider. SSID = BertB I want to achieve that all the compuers / laptops / phone and printer are in one network and can communicate with each other So the only possibility, as far as I can see, is to set up the Linksys as a bridge.
I have to do the following at the Linksys but have some questions as mentioned below:
SSID = BertB (the same) channel = different from the channel used by Thompson DHCP = off IP = fixed (192.168.2.253) gateway = 192.168.2.254
[code]....
how the thompson and the Linksys will build a connection with each other, or will this happen automatically through the above setup?Do I have to put the mac address of the thompson in the Linksys and/or vice versa?
I've small corporate network with Cisco 800 as main DSL router/firewall/DHCP. I'd like to setup Linksys E3000 (firmware: 1.0.01) as bridge (no DHCP, only wireless repeater), but there is no "bridge mode" in E3000 interface
