NETGEAR doesn't support all CIDR blocks for static routes?

[Wrathchild70]

I tried to set a static route for 192.168.0.0/16 and the RS300 complains that it's an invalid destination.  I mean, seriously?  

[FURRYe38]

Can you post a screen capture of what your configuring on the RS web page? 

Is this route upstream from the RS router?

What is the RS connected too? 

@BH-C 

[BH-C]

It looks not a CIDR classless support issue; the router thinks the destination subnet address conflicts with its LAN subnet address. It should work if you change the destination to 192.169.0.0/16 or the router's LAN IP to 10.0.0.1.

However, theres should be no conflicts since the most specific route will be matched. I will ask the team to look into it. Thanks.

[Wrathchild70]

I believe that is the case.  My WAN subnet is in 192.168.30.0/24, and when I added 192.168.128.0/17 it was ok with that, but then when I tried to add 192.168.0.0/17, it said conflict, which was a different message when I tried 192.168.0.0/16.  Either way, the RS300 doesn't support longest prefix match routing, which is a very basic feature.  There's really no such thing as a "routing conflict."

However, when I connect this in my production setup, the WAN subnet will not be in 192.168.0.0/16, so I should be ok.  But it would be good to get this fixed in case someone may actually need this.

[Wrathchild70]

FYI, my LAN side is 192.168.75.0/24, so if that is going to cause an issue adding a route to 192.168.0.0/16 or those two /17s, then I'm still going to have an issue unless I change my LAN subnet, which I don't want to do (and shouldn't have to).

Route is downstream on the LAN side...