WRVS4400N - Setting the LAN Netmask to

Discussion in 'Networking Issues' started by Malikar, Jul 27, 2011.

  1. Malikar

    Malikar Networkin' Nut Member


    I'm using a WRVS4400N v2 with latest (released June 2011) firmware from Cisco to gateway between two networks; one is a IPv4 block with a netmask (which works fine), and the LAN side is an internal /16 network running on (so, the netmask would be

    The problem is.. the WRVS4400N won't allow me to set a netmask higher than in the LAN tab.

    This means that the WAN side can only see 1/250th my internal network! (Well, the internal network isn't really that big, but the machines are more spread out along the available address range than a single /24).

    I've tried:
    1. Upgrading the firmware, hoping Cisco have seen this limitation and fixed it -- no joy.
    2. Using a hex editor to change the value in an exported configuration file, and then re-uploading it -- again no joy (it didn't seem to accept the modified configuration; just ignored it without any error message).

    Is there anything I'm missing that may help make the rest of the LAN accessible to the WAN side? (and vice versa of course). The alternative is moving all computers that need to talk to the WAN side to one LAN /24, but that feels like the wrong thing to do.

    Many thanks in advance,

    - Mali.
  2. Toxic

    Toxic Administrator Staff Member

    yes afaik many of cisco small business only allow for a class C subnet. how many devices have you for your LAN?
  3. Malikar

    Malikar Networkin' Nut Member

    Hi Toxic,

    Thanks for the reply.

    I have (much) less than 250 devices on the LAN side, even less when you exclude the devices I don't want talking to the WAN side at all (the plan was to set up a firewall to only allow certain connections), so I could renumber the network to a /24. But renumbering a whole network because one device doesn't accept a setting which really it should, doesn't feel (as an engineer myself) like the sensible approach.

    I was hoping someone would know of a fix that didn't require a renumber of everything. I have so many things relying on the current numbering scheme (like a web server that knows where the database server is, almost everything relying on the file server not moving, and firewall rules on every box and VM) -- renumbering is definitely something I want to avoid :).

    - Mali.
  4. Malikar

    Malikar Networkin' Nut Member

    Basically I'm hoping someone knows a trick that I haven't tried, to get a console up or change the settings without going through the web interface. Anything like that :).

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice