http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r22418094 en Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:59:11 EDT Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:59:11 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22418094 toddx : Just wanted to follow-up on my original post.

We finally got dual WANs set-up in each location and the VPN tunnel working. So far so good. I am dropping VPN connection every once in a while, but it seems to come back up.

Todd]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22418094 Wed, 20 May 2009 16:01:48 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22217343 ImpetusEra : In some cases you may want them in the same address range but usually it's as you have it with them using separate ranges.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22217343 Fri, 10 Apr 2009 18:21:38 EDT http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22206057 toddx : Apologies in advance if this is a dumb question, but I could use some guidance from those on the forum.

I'm helping a friend set-up a VPN tunnel between to offices. The plan is to use 2 of the FVX538s with dual WANs in each location.

My question concerns the private IPs in each location. My plan is as follows:

Location 1:
Router: 192.168.1.1
Static Range: 192.168.1.10-192.168.1.50
Dynamic Range: 192.168.1.100-192.168.1.199

Location 2:
Router: 192.168.2.1
Static Range: 192.168.2.10-192.168.2.50
Dynamic Range: 192.168.2.100-192.168.2.199

Am I approaching the addressing properly, or should I stick within the 192.168.1.x range and just spread out from there?

I've run through the online config tool and things seem fairly straight foward.

Thanks,
Todd]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,22206057 Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:32:07 EDT