Omada Network Setup with Router on another subnet
Dear All,
I am new to this setup and would greatly appreciate your guidance. I am trying to configure my network such that the gateway (or load balancer) is set up on a different subnet mask.
To provide better clarity, I have included the network diagram below.
Could you please let me know if this configuration is achievable? Any advice or suggestions on how to proceed would be highly valued.
Thank you in advance for your help!
--
Sridhar
- Copy Link
- Subscribe
- Bookmark
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @itssridhar
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
itssridhar wrote
Hi @Clive_A
Thank you for your reply and the points raised. I’d like to provide some additional context.
This setup is the result of legacy considerations, where certain components were part of an older system, and subsequent additions were made over time. At present, the Gateway/Load Balancer is solely responsible for load balancing and failover and does not handle NAT. All NAT, VPN, and firewall functionalities are managed by the pfSense.
As we are now in the process of upgrading part of our network by adding new switches and access points, and this question about the configuration has come up. I wanted to confirm whether the proposed setup with the Gateway/Load Balancer on a different subnet mask is achievable within these parameters.
Your insights and suggestions would be immensely helpful.
--
Sridhar
If that's acceptable for you to have double-NAT, or download the beta firmware to disable the NAT, both can work.
To answer the question asked, it works. As long as you do not create the overlapped subnets which is a potential problem down the road. That'll work smoothly.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @itssridhar
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
Pfsense is already a powerful firewall with load balance and NAT. Is that necessary to add an ER605 in the front?
That creates the double NAT.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @Clive_A
Thank you for your reply and the points raised. I’d like to provide some additional context.
This setup is the result of legacy considerations, where certain components were part of an older system, and subsequent additions were made over time. At present, the Gateway/Load Balancer is solely responsible for load balancing and failover and does not handle NAT. All NAT, VPN, and firewall functionalities are managed by the pfSense.
As we are now in the process of upgrading part of our network by adding new switches and access points, and this question about the configuration has come up. I wanted to confirm whether the proposed setup with the Gateway/Load Balancer on a different subnet mask is achievable within these parameters.
Your insights and suggestions would be immensely helpful.
--
Sridhar
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hi @itssridhar
Thanks for posting in our business forum.
itssridhar wrote
Hi @Clive_A
Thank you for your reply and the points raised. I’d like to provide some additional context.
This setup is the result of legacy considerations, where certain components were part of an older system, and subsequent additions were made over time. At present, the Gateway/Load Balancer is solely responsible for load balancing and failover and does not handle NAT. All NAT, VPN, and firewall functionalities are managed by the pfSense.
As we are now in the process of upgrading part of our network by adding new switches and access points, and this question about the configuration has come up. I wanted to confirm whether the proposed setup with the Gateway/Load Balancer on a different subnet mask is achievable within these parameters.
Your insights and suggestions would be immensely helpful.
--
Sridhar
If that's acceptable for you to have double-NAT, or download the beta firmware to disable the NAT, both can work.
To answer the question asked, it works. As long as you do not create the overlapped subnets which is a potential problem down the road. That'll work smoothly.
- Copy Link
- Report Inappropriate Content
Information
Helpful: 0
Views: 92
Replies: 3
Voters 0
No one has voted for it yet.