|reply to coxta |
Re: Crazy problem
You certainly can accomplish what your trying to do. The only limitation your going to run into as Uverse instead of DSL is that ATT can't pass those public IPs directly to your one router (unless you can configure your router into having multiple virtual mac addresses to pass each public IP to) , but you can run your own DHCP servers behind the NVG510 without network conflicts if the subnetwork is configured properly.
That post explains how to set up the public pool.
From what im gathering is that the OP had a switch between the modem and his two devices which are the router and camera system. Everything that I have read says that the OP will need to connect each device to a non switching hub or directly to the modem as suggested in the link you provided.
Another suggestion is for the OP to setup the switch as a non switching hub and then setup the camera system to utilize a public IP address. That defeats the purpose of having the switch. If the switch isn't capable of this then the OP might have to acquire a non switching hub or second router and configure the router to work with the camera system.
This seems to be a common issue here with att modems working as switches that can't be used as a bridge or non switching hub. Switches are faster than most routers in high traffic situations. I am assigning different routers connected to my modem with public IP addresses as suggested in your link, but I think the OP wants to let the switch assign the public IP addresses as I think he was doing before.
When somebody tells you nothing is impossible, ask him to dribble a football.
|reply to Forosnai | said by Forosnai:
as Uverse instead of DSL is that ATT can't pass those public IPs directly to your one router (unless you can configure your router into having multiple virtual mac addresses to pass each public IP to)
Not true. The NVG510 works BEAUTIFULLY with the /29 static IP block and your own REAL router, no funky virtual MAC mess needed. Just set up "cascaded router" and it'll hand the entire /29 off to your router to do whatever with; assign them to internal dummy/loopback interfaces, hand out downstream, whatever, the NVG doesn't care.
That is really good to hear. I have never read or heard of anyone having success with the cascaded router option with a static IP block.
Working great here for about a year now