NETGEAR is aware of a growing number of phone and online scams. To learn how to stay safe click here.
Forum Discussion
Can LAN interface of RS100 be set to a public IP address?
I have obtained a /29 range of public IP addresses from my ISP. That /29 network resides on the LAN interface of the cable router/modem/whatever you want to call it.
At the moment I am using a Zyxel router for the job and it works well- it has no issue with letting me set the LAN IP address to a public IP address- but for some reason it limits my upload speed to <100Mb/s where it's supposed to be 200Mb/s.
I tried a Sagemcom device as an alternative. It has no problem hitting the 200Mb/s upload speed BUT it will not allow me to set the LAN interface IP to a public IP address (45.11.x.x) - it says 'Invalid IP address'.
Before I go to the bother of purchasing an RS100 (and then having to return it if it doesn't work), I am trying to find out whether it will allow me to set the LAN IP address to a public IP address.
Any advice would be much appreciated!
12 Replies
An update for the benefit of anyone who was thinking of purchasing the RS100 for the same job as I did.
The answer to my original question was 'Yes' - it WOULD let me assign a public address to the LAN interface.
However it WOULDN'T let me disable NAT, meaning that none of the LAN-side devices were able to use their static IPs properly.
When I went to whatsmyip.org on any of the LAN-side devices, instead of showing the device's own static IP (45.11.x.x), it would instead show the IP address of the WAN interface of the RS100.
So it's back to Amazon for the RS100 I'm afraid, and the search goes on for a router which does the job I want it to do. That's the fourth device I've tried and every one has had SOMETHING preventing it from being the solution.
an old Huawei: Worked perfectly except due to its age it only has 100Mb ports;
a Sagemcom: Wouldn't let me set LAN interface to a public IP;
A Zyxel: Worked perfectly except for some unexplained reason it couldn't do more than 100Mb/s upload (the others would do over 200Mb/s)
Thanks to everyone for contributing!
If your going to have two routers on the same line, then use the host routers DMZ or IP Pass thru to help with double NAT issues.
StephenB CrimpOn Thank you for your advice on this. I took a punt and ordered the RS100 on Amazon since it's easy enough to return stuff to them if it turns out not to be capable of the job.
It arrived this morning and I was able to set the LAN interface IP to a public IP address/subnet with no problems whatsoever.
All that remains is for me to hook it up and verify that I can get the full 200Mb/s upload speed I'm looking for. Wish me luck...
Thanks again!p.s. As an experiment, I just now configured an Orbi 750 router to set the LAN subnet to public IP address 12.0.0.0 (255.255.255.0). Took it just fine. Assigned 12.0.0.1 to the router LAN and 12.0.0.x addresses to devices connected to the router. One concern is that the router interface does not accept an IP subnet different from 255.255.255.0 It is possible to restrict the DHCP range on the router. Probably not an issue with this setup since the RS100 only exists to provide the PPPoE user name/password.
It could be that the RS100 does not allow the same configuration options as the Orbi.
oh fudge, did not think about WAN/LAN conflict. The Orbi router refuses to create a LAN subnet that is part of the WAN subnet. If there was a way to delete this post, I'd do it.
NEVER MIND.
The Orbi router refuses to create a LAN subnet that is part of the WAN subnet.
Obviously that would be a problem for this use case.
But the Orbi has no way to turn off NAT filtering (unlike the RS100). At least that is the case with the 870.
If you aren't doing NAT, then it makes sense for the LAN subnet to be part of the WAN subset. In fact, I can't think of any scenario w/o NAT that you wouldn't want that.
So the RS100 might behave differently.
"My Bad" for not reading the title correctly. (LAN port - clear as day) Sorry.
Yes, defining a Static IP address for the router WAN port is a feature of the RS100. From page 29 of the User Manual:
https://www.downloads.netgear.com/files/GDC/RS90/RS100-90-70_UM_EN.pdf
The key is that the ISP assigns the address. Customers cannot just decide on their own what public IP address they want to use.
Hi CrimpOn,
It's the LAN interface of the router I need to set to a public IP address - not the WAN port. I know there'll be no problem on the WAN interface.
To be honest, I would never have expected this to be a problem on ANY router until I found out the hard way that my Sagemcom router won't let me do it.Yes, defining a Static IP address for the router WAN port is a feature of the RS100
Not sure that answers the question. But you can disable NAT filtering in the router, so I think you can set up public IP address subnet on the LAN.
As I said above, if the ISP is giving you this subnet you shouldn't need a router.
But you might not want all your devices on the public internet. So you might want to connect a router up for those devices (using private addressing on its LAN).
Dinner42w_aView - are you deploying servers? If not, then what is the motivation for public addressing?
I have obtained a /29 range of public IP addresses from my ISP.
Do you actually need a router? I think a switch would be enough (assuming you have no more than 8 devices to connect).
But you also should deploy a firewall, since in consumer routers that is integrated with NAT - which you need to run off in order to use public addresses.
FWIW, I am wondering why you want public IP addresses if you are also deploying a router.
Hi StephenB,
The WAN side of the router connects to the ISP via PPPoE and gets a separate, single IP address . They've configured their end so that 'the internet' knows the next hop to the /29 subnet is via the public IP that's allocated to the router's WAN port.
It's the PPPoE element that's forcing me to use a router rather than a simple switch.
I have two firewalls (a main and a standby) on the LAN side of the router. Each firewall has two WAN ports. Each WAN port requires an individual static IP address for the firewall rules to work.
If I didn't use multiple static IPs, every WAN port would (as far as the system is concerned) have the same public IP address and then the firewall doesn't know which WAN port to direct incoming traffic to. Ask me how I know....
The WAN side of the router connects to the ISP via PPPoE and gets a separate, single IP address . They've configured their end so that 'the internet' knows the next hop to the /29 subnet is via the public IP that's allocated to the router's WAN port.
It's the PPPoE element that's forcing me to use a router rather than a simple switch.The RS100 isn't a router I have, and I don't need multiple public addresses. So not something I've tried.
That said, it looks like the RS100 has the features you want.
