Trouble Port Forwarding

[DeputyDawg]

pete_c...my feeling were not hurt and my post was not to you.  I was not offended nor "whining".  I'm looking for answers and unlike a lot of you who are experts in networking us folks who use this forum for answers are not looking for talk downs but solutions. You and others have provided good input and I'd like to keep asking the questions until I get a solution and maybe achieve your level of expertise.

 

[pete_c]

Understood.
 
You were whining
 
You perceived that "talking down to you" all by yourself when in fact everyone posting was trying to help you.

 

[DeputyDawg]

pete_c...I learnt long time ago not to argue with an idiot.  I guess you missed the point I made about you and others helping.  So any further help is appreciated.  Continued bickering is discouraged. Get over it.

 

[pete_c]

Great indication of your insolence.  I wasn't arguing with you. 
 
I was making statements relating to
 
1 - you providing a concise request and when you do that you will get a concise response and
2 - how you dealt with the questions posted to you about what you were doing. 
 
That is all.
 
That is the way of the world.   There is no bickering with these statements. (they are one way directed to you)
 
Please don't get frustrated when folks ask you about what you are asking about. 
 
It will help you to achieve your goals (as asked in your original post).

 

[wuench]

I agree you would be better off eliminating the 2nd subnet.   You can probably do it by just not using the WAN port on the upstairs router, either router(but only one) can do the DHCP.   Upstairs can still provide Wifi.
 
But if you still want to try the dual port forwarding, the error you are getting is because you are trying to forward on the downstairs router to a subnet it doesn't know about (192.168.2.x/24).   You have to forward on the downstairs router to the 192.168.0.x address on the upstairs router.   It is not listed on your drawing, but there has to be one, it may be assigned via DHCP from the downstairs router.

 

[DeputyDawg]

Since I still need the WIFI on the upstairs Router as the Time Warner modem WIFI will not work up there, could I put a Hub up there and then connect the Router to it and then connect the DVR2 to the Hub?  This would allow me to port forward from the Time Warner modem downstairs for DVR2  and then have the WIFI capability in that area. Thoughts?
 
wuench...the upstairs router is 192.168.2.1.  But no doubt from all the comments I have to eliminate the 2nd subnet.

 

[RAL]

The upstairs router has addresses on both sides, one address on the WAN connection side, which is a 192.168.1.x address and then others on the LAN connection side, which are the 192.168.2.x addresses. 
 
You're probably unaware of the WAN address because it is being assigned by DHCP on the Time Warner router.  This is what @wuench was trying to explain and is the key to the problems you are having.
 
If you unplug the cable from the TW router from the WAN jack on the upstairs router and move it to one of the LAN jacks, that will eliminate the 192.168.2.x network, and place everything on the 192.168.1.x network.  Essentially, you'll be using the upstairs router as an ethernet switch rather than a router.  You'll still be able to use the WiFi on the upstairs router this way.  You'll need to change the configuration info on the upstairs router regarding DHCP, etc, as was explained in earlier posts.

 

[DeputyDawg]

Great input.  Problem solved as instructed.  Thanks for input. 
 
DDawg

 

[LarrylLix]

Wow! So much sanctioned ad hominem in this forum.  Need to keep comments related to the equipment and problem.
Nice recovery OP.
 
I use three routers and none need any port forwarding used to make it happen. They all use the same sub-network address range 192.168.0.xx as posted by another above. Two are hardwired Ethenet and the third one  talks 2.4GHz WiFi Ethernet to the other two being in a remote building.
 
Port forwarding just complicates the connections and keeping everything on one LAN range works well. Now equipment can be moved from one section of LAN to another, or one section of WiFi or another, without any resetting of configuration.

 

[fcwilt]

I use three routers and none need any port forwarding used to make it happen. They all use the same sub-network address range 192.168.0.xx as posted by another above. Two are hardwired Ethenet and the third one  talks 2.4GHz WiFi Ethernet to the other two being in a remote building.
 
Port forwarding just complicates the connections and keeping everything on one LAN range works well. Now equipment can be moved from one section of LAN to another, or one section of WiFi or another, without any resetting of configuration.

 
If you only have one sub-net your "routers" are not being used as routers. Perhaps you are simply using them as Wireless Access Points?
 
As to port forwarding: unless you are prepared to put all of the devices requiring external access on a DMZ you are going to need port forwarding.
 
Frederick

 

[wuench]

The upstairs router has addresses on both sides, one address on the WAN connection side, which is a 192.168.1.x address and then others on the LAN connection side, which are the 192.168.2.x addresses. 
 
You're probably unaware of the WAN address because it is being assigned by DHCP on the Time Warner router.  This is what @wuench was trying to explain and is the key to the problems you are having.
 
If you unplug the cable from the TW router from the WAN jack on the upstairs router and move it to one of the LAN jacks, that will eliminate the 192.168.2.x network, and place everything on the 192.168.1.x network.  Essentially, you'll be using the upstairs router as an ethernet switch rather than a router.  You'll still be able to use the WiFi on the upstairs router this way.  You'll need to change the configuration info on the upstairs router regarding DHCP, etc, as was explained in earlier posts.

 
lol sometimes I wonder if I am speaking English.     Thanks RAL....

 

[RAL]

lol sometimes I wonder if I am speaking English.     Thanks RAL....

 
Your explanation was fine - nothing wrong with it.  It made sense to me.
 
From my own learning experiences over the years, I've found that sometimes I need to have something explained 3 different ways before the "light bulb" comes on and I finally understand what I'm being told.

 

[LarrylLix]

@FCW (since quoting has never worked on this forum)
Access points also, but mainly using them as Hubs or Switcehes,depending on which the router contains. No DMZ necessary as it is never needed. Hubs/switches inside routers are not capable of port forwarding but port forwarding would only be required on one router.
 
Trying to port forward two different LAN subnets so they can commicate via external adresses would be creating unnecessary security holes, distance factors excepted.

 

[fcwilt]

@FCW (since quoting has never worked on this forum)
Access points also, but mainly using them as Hubs or Switcehes,depending on which the router contains. No DMZ necessary as it is never needed. Hubs/switches inside routers are not capable of port forwarding but port forwarding would only be required on one router.
 
Trying to port forward two different LAN subnets so they can commicate via external adresses would be creating unnecessary security holes, distance factors excepted.

 
Not sure why you think quoting doesn't work.
 
I've never seen a router of recent vintage with a hub - very old tech.
 
DMZs are sometimes very useful.
 
Port forwarding is perhaps the most common approach to allowing external access. If you need two internal sub-nets to communicate use a router.
 
Frederick

 

[pete_c]

Quoting works for me:
 

@FCW (since quoting has never worked on this forum)

 
I usually do not use it preferring this instead:
 
@FCW (since quoting has never worked on this forum)