R-200 Routers - Incorrect Default Configuration - IP - 192.169.11.1

I went back and tested one of the new R190W routers that was serving 192.169.11.xxx address on the LAN side.  

You are correct. 

If our WAN with DHCP is connected to the router before it boots up, it causes the router to change its default LAN address from 192.168.11.xxx/24 to 192.169.11.xxx/24 and serve address within that Class C Octet. 

We run a /16 subnet on our WAN.  We also run all of our routers in the NAT mode.

What is the rational that the firmware in the routers are programmed to change their defaut IP addresses from 192.168.11.1 to 192.169.11.1? 

I went back into the 4.3.3-R4 manual to see if I could find any reference telling us that the firmware is programmed to change the default LAN IP addresses, but didn't find any reference.   Might that undesired "feature" documented anywhere else?

1 Like

Hi Danny,

Glad to hear that, that now we know what was causing trouble for you. 

This is a design requirement to switch the LAN side DHCP pool when the device detects a WAN network which overlaps with that on the LAN side. The software internally switches to the next available network pool. This is a must, otherwise we will end up in IP conflict conditions and system operations will be affected.

Since this does not explicitly involve users, it was omitted from the User Guide. However I think it is a good idea to include this information. I shall get the docs updated on the next available opportunity.

If this solves the problem you can mark the explanation/solution as accepted.

Thanks 

Ashutosh

Ha!

All routers do that - the WAN ip subnet can not be the same range as the LAN ip subnet. Most routers however wont automatically re-configure themselves so its quite nice that the router will still try and work if this is the case. 

Now I am going to throw a spanner in the works. 

We have had some issues with R190V routers issuing 192.168.11.50 as the gateway address and no web interface presents itself on either 192.168.11.50 or .11.1 - I had been ignoring it because it can still download its config from the cloud and works how we want it. 

I shall pay more attention next time i see this and try to document it like the OP of this thread.