TRB160 and IP static routes

NETWORKING SOLUTIONS
1

Hello,
I have a new TRB160, firmware TRB16_R_00.17.13.2 (which I believe is the latest available).
I have a problem very similar to RUT200 and IP static route, which did not have a follow up.

New device, no other config. I set a static address 192.168.42.101 to the RB160 on LAN and want to set a static route for 192.168.0.0/16 to the IP gateway 192.168.42.254. WAN/mobile is off.

I can add the route successfully:

image
image1920×480 76.7 KB

As soon as I hit “refresh” I get an empty entry

image
image1920×463 77.2 KB

	
BusyBox v1.34.1 (2025-03-17 11:15:36 UTC) built-in shell (ash)                                                   
                                                                                                                 
     ____        _    ___  ____                                                                                  
    |  _ \ _   _| |_ / _ \/ ___|                                                                                 
    | |_) | | | | __| | | \___ \                                                                                 
    |  _ <| |_| | |_| |_| |___) |                                                                                
    |_| \_\\__,_|\__|\___/|____/                                                                                 
-------------------------------------                                                                            
     Teltonika TRB16 series 2025                                                                                 
-------------------------------------                                                                            
   Device:     TRB160                                                                                            
   Kernel:     5.4.197-perf                                                                                      
   Firmware:   TRB16_R_00.07.13.2                                                                                
   Build:      4e4fd7a20bc                                                                                       
   Build date: 2025-03-17 13:11:58                                                                               
-------------------------------------                                                                            
root@TRB160:~# ip r                                                                                              
169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.4.1                                                  
192.168.42.0/24 dev br-lan proto kernel scope link src 192.168.42.101                                            
root@TRB160:~#
2

I temporarily solved the issue by removing eth0 from the bridge and setting the routes in UCI, but could not use the GUI to set them (even without the bridge)

3

Hello,

This looks suspicious the destination should be 192.168.0.0/24 and the netmask 255.255.255.0.

Regards,

4

Uh, why? I have several subnetworks in 192.168.0.0/16 all reachable through 192.168.42.254 which is the gateway for 192.168.42.0/24 where I sit. I think it’s perfectly legal. Evidence: openwrt likes it. :slight_smile:

root@TRB160:~# ip r
default dev rmnet_data0 proto static scope link src 10.125.24.189 metric 1
10.125.24.189 dev rmnet_data0 proto static scope link src 10.125.24.189 metric 1
169.254.0.0/16 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 169.254.4.1
192.168.0.0/16 via 192.168.42.254 dev eth0 proto static
192.168.42.0/24 dev eth0 proto kernel scope link src 192.168.42.101
5

Sure it is legal but somewhat uncommon. What is the netmask of the lan interface ?

6

It’s a /24. Lan address is 192.168.42.101/24.

7

This is strange. A similar route works for me on a RUTX11.

8

I don’t think it has to do with the route itself. Any static route that I could think of does the same, i don’t have another device here to try.

9

Then this is probably a bug in the underlying UI code.

11

Hello,

I’ve tried to replicate the described behavior on TRB160 when adding the same static route through WebUI, but I couldn’t reproduce the issue. After adding the route and device reboot, it was saved and visible via ip r / route -n.

Does this issue persist after a hard reboot or factory reset (if that’s a feasible option)?

If so, for further investigation, I will need to contact you privately. A form has been sent to your email (used for registering on the forum). When completing it, please use ticket ID 12901.

Best regards,

12

Oh, just realized it works perfectly in incognito mode.
I suppose I have the same set of extensions over multiple devices, so it must be one of them.

Sorry for the false alarm.

1 Like
13

This topic was automatically closed 2 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.