Multiple routers

[DragonFlame]

Hi,

So I'm pretty noob at setting up networks around the house, they'll work but I'm not really sure how the port forwarding and stuffs would work...

Just to explain the setup I have a bell modem and it is directly connected to a router, which has wires going all around the house. Just to extend the access I have plugged in another router to the original to extend the number of ports to go out and in my room i have a wireless router set up.

So... Simply
Modem --> Router1 --> Router2 --> Router3 --> computer

I'm familiar with port forwarding in terms of i know how to forward the ports in the routers to the ip address but this doesn't seem to actually forward the ports when i test them.

I read i need to forward the ports from Router1 to Router2 then from Router2 to Router3 then from Router3 to my computer. I'm just wondering what is the IP address I should be forwarding to.

On my LAN I have
Router1 as 192.168.0.1
Router2 as 192.168.0.2
Router3 as 192.168.0.3

I have my comp set up at
192.168.0.103
Through MAC so it stays the same all the time.

So say I want to forward port 60000 to my computer how would i do this?
I'm also wanting to setup my PS3 connected to the last router (same as comp) as DMZ as i don't really know what port it uses but it doesn't seem to work out too well for me.

Any help would be appreciated, or if you could direct me to a website?

[Perineum]

This would be so much easier using a switch.

You might clean up double, and triple IP/NAT situations by not using the WAN port on the router

IE: Bell modem goes to WAN port on Router1 then plug any of the ports from 1 to 4 to ports 1 to 4 on Router 2.

That should make Router1 control everything.

Honestly, you should have Router1 then port 1 going to uplink port on a good 5, 8 or 16 port switch and then just do the obvious.

[Safearus]

Well, you could always disable DHCP on the multitude of secondary routers within the network. They'll run like hubs at that point. But the config on the main router would be semi-complicated if you're not one to network often, or have much networking knowledge. I'll have to agree with Perineum 100% on this one saying that a switch would be better in your situation.

[Mr. Cipher]

For what it's worth I'll throw my Cisco training onto the pile and concur: bell modem --> router --> switches. That way you won't have to configure multiple routers.

If cost is a concern, Safearus' suggestion of switching off DHCP would help tremendously.

[Arinoth]

Just like everyone else is suggesting, you'd be better off with using just 1 router and going to switches, or turning off DHCP in the other 2 routers to have them act like switches and just go through the one router.

[DragonFlame]

Erm... I guess my networking terminology isn't fantastic

Though I have set up my other routers as switches, turned off DHCP except for in the first one then just connect to the 1-4 ports (uplink?) yeah that's how i've done it. It seems though I'm still being blocked, I guess i'll try resetting it all up.

thanks for the responses all :)

In terms of the switches and stuff... The real issue is that i need the multiple routers is due to the location of the wiring, it's not that i want to use multiple routers but i need to in order to get the wires to go where i want them in my room, heh. Just wanted an easy way to do it since I'm home from school.

[Safearus]

Some help for the terminology part:
How does a network switch work?
Network Switch - Wikipedia

Also, a switch looks like a router, and has multiple ports. So realistically they would work the same way as the routers you're using, just more effectively.

Note: When you disable DHCP do not use the UpLink port. Connect from the first router port1-4 into router#2 port1-4

[Squeetard]

You can't use the wan/uplink port. You turn off dhcp, and set the role from router to gateway. Then you have to run from one of the 4 ports to the other routers.

[Shadowmeph]

Originally Posted by DragonFlame

Erm... I guess my networking terminology isn't fantastic

Though I have set up my other routers as switches, turned off DHCP except for in the first one then just connect to the 1-4 ports (uplink?) yeah that's how i've done it. It seems though I'm still being blocked, I guess i'll try resetting it all up.

thanks for the responses all :)

In terms of the switches and stuff... The real issue is that i need the multiple routers is due to the location of the wiring, it's not that i want to use multiple routers but i need to in order to get the wires to go where i want them in my room, heh. Just wanted an easy way to do it since I'm home from school.

that is what I had to do when I was using a home computer as a firewall and I used a router but wasn't abl to connect to the net I found out after an extensive internet search that I was double NATed which is pretty much a No No I then turned off the DHCP ( which turned my router into a switch) and was able to connect to the ( Qouting x president Bush ) " the internet Web thing" . SO turn off all DHCP on all routers except for the first router and you should be fine

[RyanJ]

If all of your routers are on the same subnet (which they are; unless you're using an impossible subnet mask) then you don't need to forward anything from 1->2 and 2->3. The only one you have to forward any ports on is the main router that faces the internet (the one connected to the modem).

The other routers, as long as they're not plugged in to the WAN ports, are not functioning as routers but simply switches and so they will forward the requests transparently.

Again, NO configuration should be needed in the other routers (except turning off DHCP which you've probably already done).

As another Cisco trained guy, I would recommend strongly that you ditch the other routers and replace them with an 8 or 16 port switch with the router hanging off one port. You may actually see network speed improvements.

-r-