dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
4508
srp7474
join:2016-08-18
North York, ON

srp7474

Member

Howto connect Bell Hub 2000 to internal private network with own router

I recently had Bell Install a Hub 2000 router as I upgraded my Fibe connection. Much to my dismay I could not change the 192.168.2.1 address. I called Bell and they responded changing it was disabled and only available for business customers.

I have a significant private network running on 10.1.1.x that I wished to connect. In fact I also have a Rogers account also on this network so I have redundancy for when I need it.

I looked on the internet and (including this site) and was lead down the garden path with trying to do a PPPoE connection to the Hub2000 from my router running as 10,.1.1.xx. This did not work.

The solution turned out to be very simple.

I connected from my spare D-Link router on the 10.1.1.xx as follows.
(1) Ran an RJ45 cable from the D-Link WAN port to a spare LAN port on the HUB2000.
(2) Configured the WAN port on the D-LINK as:
Internet connect DHCP
Primary DNS Server 192.168.2.1
Secondary DNS Server same
MTU 1500.

Did a connect (actualy a renew) and it worked like a champ. I can use the wireless connection on the Hub2000 to get outside access and keep my private network out of bounds. Any 10.1.1.?? device that wants to connect thru the Hub2000 uses the 10.1.1.XX device as its gateway.

Your mileage with a different router may vary but in principle it would be the same.

I wanted to make this simple discovery available as my way of saying thanks and increasing the crowd-sourced knowledge out there.

Steve

chamberc
Premium Member
join:2008-08-05
Addison, TX

chamberc

Premium Member

Tell them to put it into bridge mode and use whatever internal nat'd addresses you want with your own router.

Anon521f9
@bell.ca

2 recommendations

Anon521f9 to srp7474

Anon

to srp7474
said by srp7474:

The solution turned out to be very simple.

I connected from my spare D-Link router on the 10.1.1.xx as follows.
(1) Ran an RJ45 cable from the D-Link WAN port to a spare LAN port on the HUB2000.
(2) Configured the WAN port on the D-LINK as:
Internet connect DHCP
Primary DNS Server 192.168.2.1
Secondary DNS Server same
MTU 1500.

Did a connect (actualy a renew) and it worked like a champ. I can use the wireless connection on the Hub2000 to get outside access and keep my private network out of bounds. Any 10.1.1.?? device that wants to connect thru the Hub2000 uses the 10.1.1.XX device as its gateway.

That's not really a solution per se, as your private 10.1.1.x network served by the D-Link router is now double NAT'd behind the HH2000. The better option and true solution is to simply configure your D-Link router with the same PPPoE username/password as Bell supplied you for Internet access, as that will give your D-Link router a public IP and prevent the double NAT. There is no limit on the number of active PPPoE sessions, so it won't affect any services like TV that operate on the HH2000. There's no need for Bell to put the HH2000 into bridge mode, as you can pass a PPPoE through the router automatically without any configuration and this works even with Gigabit speeds. There are even ways to get rid of the HH2000 all together, with lots of information in various posts across this forum.
pedro1x
join:2016-08-12
j6w0b3

pedro1x to srp7474

Member

to srp7474
I agree with Anon521f9, and as you stated before you used DLINK WAN port to LAN of HH2000 to do pppoe , this should work. if it doesn't then you are missing something on your config. this is pretty straight forward.

If you want to establish pppoe directly to ONT without being on the HH2000 LAN , then you need to work with vlans.
srp7474
join:2016-08-18
North York, ON

3 edits

srp7474 to Anon521f9

Member

to Anon521f9
Further update after posting questions:

PPPoE did finally work. I specified a DHCP connection from the D-LINK to the Hub2000. Will go with this but keep comments below for historical reasons.

However, I can no longer sit on my 10.1.1.xx network and access 192.168.2.1 (which makes sense) which I could do with my DHCP type connection. So the question of the day becomes is a double NATed connection problematic.

Thanks,
Steve

Thanks Anon5211f for the info. 2 questions.
(1) 'double NATed' sounds like an efficiency issue. Is it more onerous than that? Should I worry? It does work.

(2) I did not tell the full story. I have multiple Bell phone lines into my house. In the early days Bell installed a DSL modem (2-wire gateway) on line 1. Then when they later installed the Fibe modem they by mistake but fortuitously installed it on line 2. It solved a problem because the TVs were not watchable while my private network was connected to the Fibe modem. As a result I never added the 10.1.1.x internal connection to the Fibe modem (I am pretty far from the substation was the reason given by Bell). Now that they have upgraded to Fibe 25 with the Hub2000 that issue as gone away. But the new issue of not being able to change the 198.168.2.1 address arose.

Meanwhile the 2-wire continues to operate but uses the same B1xxxx/password combo to connect and gets its own external IP address. The interesting thing is that my monthly limit is the sum of the 2 external IPs, not the maximum of any individual IP.

Is it possible Bell allows 2 IPs but not 3 which would explain why I cannot do the PPPoE connection thru the Hub2000. I have been pretty careful to check the parameters.

Thanks
Steve
pedro1x
join:2016-08-12
j6w0b3

pedro1x

Member

First of all, Bell will allow you to do multiple pppoe connections. Not just 2. There are people here who are doing 3-4 pppoe sessions.

You should be able to reach your 192.168.2.0 from your 10.1.1.x , just need to establish routing.

Anon1df7e
@bell.ca

Anon1df7e to srp7474

Anon

to srp7474
said by srp7474:

Is it possible Bell allows 2 IPs but not 3 which would explain why I cannot do the PPPoE connection thru the Hub2000. I have been pretty careful to check the parameters.

No. I've had five PPPoE sessions going simultaneously without any issues.

WarningU2
Premium Member
join:2002-10-27
Burlington, ON

WarningU2 to srp7474

Premium Member

to srp7474
I have a DLlink switch (DGS-1005G) which I have connection to the Bell hub ... allows me to have my own router for my Wi-Fi and my work laptop with its own IP. No bridge mode. Works like a charm.
srp7474
join:2016-08-18
North York, ON

srp7474

Member

Thanks for the response. As I indicated above, it now works. My other question has not been answered. For my learning, is there a problem with double NATTed connections? Perhaps you or someone else can enlighten me.

H0W1K2
Premium Member
join:2016-02-05
Toronto

H0W1K2

Premium Member

@ srp7474
Give this webpage a shot and see if you understand what double nat does.

»www.practicallynetworked ··· _nat.htm
srp7474
join:2016-08-18
North York, ON

1 edit

srp7474

Member

many thanks. As I see it the double NAT may be a good thing as it isolates my 10.1.1.x network. I have other means to port forward to servers running on the 10.1.1.x network which my reading says is the main loss with a double NAT situation.