Hi,
I have a RUT955 modem which is connected to a camera with IP 192.168.1.108 and to a SBPC with IP 192.168.1.200. When I connect to the modem WiFi I can ping and access the other 2 devices with no problem.
I am trying to setup a VPN Hub for this system and I have serious problems.
I followed the official video guide and everything works fine for connecting the the camera. The problem comes when I add a similar route for the SBPC (IP 192.168.1.200). When restarting the VPN and after that my client, I am still able to reach the camera, but still not able to reach the SBPC.
I checked the SBPC gateway (192.168.1.1) and used netmask the same as for the camera.
Can you please help me here?
Why can I reach the modem and the camera but not the SBPC?
Would you be able to test by adding a single route in RMS VPN to the LAN network of RUT955 (192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 via RUT955) to determine if this resolves the issue? Additionally, try restarting the hub to ensure the changes take effect.
When you mention that you are unable to access the SBPC, how are you testing this? Are you trying to access it via a web browser, some software application, or you try to ping it? Are pings successful?
For further testing, could you attempt to reach your SBPC using the RMS Connect feature instead of VPN?
Lastly, are both the SBPC and the camera directly connected to the LAN ports of the RUT955?
The camera and the SBPC are directly connected to the LAN ports of RUT955.
I tried adding 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0, but didn’t resolve the issue.
When I say that I can’t reach the SBPC I mean I cannot ping it nor SSH into it. But I can ping and SSH into the camera
The RMS Connect feature works and I can SSH into the board.
My objective is to run a software on the SBPC and use a software on my laptop to connect to the software on the SBPC via UDP. This should be feasible by using a VPN, that’s why I cannot be satisfied by reaching the SBPC via RMS Connect just yet.
On RUT955, could you please try enabling masquerading on LAN zone for testing purposes? In Network → Firewall → General settings, enable masquerading for LAN => WAN/OpenVPN.
Hi,
that works indeed and now I can SSH into the SBPC from my laptop over VPN.
However now I am not able to reach the camera via the browser nor ping it through CLI. Camera is also on fixed IP.
The only route I have in RMS, as you suggested, is 192.168.1.0/255.255.255.0 via RUT955.
Should I change something here?
Do I understand correctly that with LAN masquerading the access to camera is lost? Is it working is you disable masquerading back again?
You understand correctly. If I enable masquerading I can ssh and ping the SBPC but not the camera. If I disable it I cannot reach anything using their local static IPs.
Please let me show you my current setup on the RUT955 and RMS.
On the RUT955 first, RMS right after. I made a joint image for convenience.
Physical Settings → Bridge interfaces (enabled) → interface eth0.1
Firewall Settings → Create/Assign firewall zone: lan
DHCP Server is enabled, start ip 192.168.1.100 to 192.168.1.249
Dynamic DHCP is enabled
IPV6 settings, all disabled.
There might be a routing conflict somewhere in the network. Can you try changing routing on the RMS hub and specify routes to devices themselves as before? What are the results?
Are there any settings on SBPC besides IP address, netmask, and gateway? Any chance it would be possible to configure it to allow non-local traffic? Since it has a default gateway to RUT955 and is directly connected, then it should route traffic coming from RMS via RUT955. It should not be necessary to use Masquerading on LAN.
The IP camera now has 192.168.1.251 as an IP, while its original IP (192.168.1.108) is routed several times.
Also, there are two IPv4 routes for the VPN. Seems weird to me.
I added the route manually in RMS as you suggested, as you see in the image.
