Thread Info
  • State Verified Answer
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 4 replies
  • Subscribers 4 subscribers
  • Views 4654 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

UTM 125 + AP 55s + VLAN + DHCP server problems

onit12

Hi

UTM 125 and AP55 AccessPoints here.

I would like to put the AP55 Access Points in a seperated VLAN (Layer 2 Switches available). 
But I am already failing one step ahead, did not getting any ip adress of the DHCP Server.


I have created an Ethernet VLAN 2

DHCP Server in this VLAN

 

and a Win10 client plugged into eth3

Interfaces are up:

 

But even if i configure my NIC the static ip range in this VLAN i cannot reach the gateway and there are obviously no packets transmitted. 

Tried this on the UTM 125 Appliance and in my Testlab with the UTM virtual appliance. What am i doing wrong!? 

 

Thanks

Tino 

 

 

 



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0

    Hi. Tino, and welcome to the UTM Community!

    What is the reason to not do UTM Wireless the regular way?  What requirements are you trying to meet?

    Cheers - Bob

  • 0 in reply to BAlfson

    Hello Bob,

    thanks for your answer.

    The reason i would like to separate the Access Points is on the one hand because of the availability of Layer 2 Switches and on the other hand because it's not really clear to me how "spereated" the traffic is, if i do it the regular way.

    As regular way I think you mean Wireless configuration as "Seperated Zone"?

    Is this "best practice"?

    Thanks

    Tino

  • +1 in reply to onit12

    In essence, Tino, each AP communicates through a hybrid RED tunnel with the UTM for "Separate Zone" SSIDs.  If one of the SSIDs is bridged to the LAN/VLAN the AP is in, it communicates directly with that subnet instead of sending the traffic through the UTM.  It is also possible to do an after-the-fact bridge with the wlan# virtual NIC that was created when a "Separate Zone" SSID was defined.

    I didn't hear a good reason to vary from using a "Separate Zone" SSID in your description of your situation, and you don't need to worry about how "separated" the traffic will be.  In general, I enable 'Client isolation' in guest networks and enable 'Hide SSID' for extra security in many internal networks.

    Cheers - Bob

Reply
  • +1 in reply to onit12

    In essence, Tino, each AP communicates through a hybrid RED tunnel with the UTM for "Separate Zone" SSIDs.  If one of the SSIDs is bridged to the LAN/VLAN the AP is in, it communicates directly with that subnet instead of sending the traffic through the UTM.  It is also possible to do an after-the-fact bridge with the wlan# virtual NIC that was created when a "Separate Zone" SSID was defined.

    I didn't hear a good reason to vary from using a "Separate Zone" SSID in your description of your situation, and you don't need to worry about how "separated" the traffic will be.  In general, I enable 'Client isolation' in guest networks and enable 'Hide SSID' for extra security in many internal networks.

    Cheers - Bob

Children