RV042G to RV320 - unable to duplicate network setup

[dan.stevenson]

Greetings,

Hopefully someone will have some insight or suggestions on how I can accomplish the same setup I had on our RV042G routers. I purchased the RV320's because I thought that being in the same family the configuration would be similar but I'm running into a problem with the subnet limitation of the RV320.

A little background info. Previously I had a gateway to gateway VPN between our office and showroom. On the office side I have a CentOS server providing DNS and DHCP. Because we would run out of IP address at the office whenever we had company meetings I switched from the default class C subnet to a class B 255.255.254.0. All wired devices on the office LAN are assigned static IP's in the 192.168.0.x range. All wireless devices in the office were assigned addresses in the 192.168.1.x range by the CentOS DHCP server. Our showroom is using addresses in the 129.168.2.x range.

With this setup everything worked great. I was able to ping any device in any address range from either side of the tunnel.

I setup the RV320's and have the VPN tunnel up but I was unable to get any devices in the 192.168.1.x range to ping any devices in the 192.168.0.x or 192.168.2.x range. I tried setting up a VLAN for the 192.168.1.0 network and enabled interVLAN routing with the default VLAN but it does not work. As a workaround I had to modify the setup of my DHCP server to supply addresses in the 129.168.0.x range but now I am limited in the number of available IP's for wireless devices again.

Is the setup I'm trying to duplicate from the old RV042G's impossible with the RV320's? Can the subnet be modified through the CLI or is it locked into a class C subnet with this model? I'm very disappointed that Cisco chose to enable this limitation on what is otherwise a great upgrade for the RV042G.

[balaji.bandi]

Not sure what went wrong here, RV320 higher model than old one you have, so you should able to do all the config what you mentioned, make sure you have latest firmware in Rf320, keep side by side config and do the config.

Since the product newly bought, you can have SMB tac support also for migration.

[dan.stevenson]

As I mentioned the problem is the RV320's lack of support for anything other than a class C 255.255.255.0 subnet. After I realized the issue I found other posts mentioning the same lack of ability to modify the subnet mask to anything other than class C. It appears to be a design limitation. I made a booklet of screenshots of each page of the RV042G config screens before setting up the RV320's and spent hours trying different configurations for the VLAN's but could not get all three network ranges to be able to ping each other. I'm sure that setting a 255.255.254.0 subnet mask would solve the issue but the GUI will not allow it.

[dan.stevenson]

This post below outlines the RV320 subnet issue. Wish I had known about this limitation before making the purchase. It took me weeks to even find a vendor that had these in stock brand new, after talking with Cisco sales reps, researching different models, and deciding this was the best upgrade for our RV042G's. They were pushing me to purchase something from the Meraki line but they are overkill for what we need and I do not want a cloud based router with a paid subscription required.

https://community.cisco.com/t5/small-business-routers/rv320-class-a-subnet-support/td-p/2413874

[balaji.bandi]

That unfortunate, May if you have return policy before 21days, you should take advantage and return back.

[dan.stevenson]

If these were just a couple of home routers and our entire business did not rely on them I would definitely setup a return. Since everything is working now, even if sub-optimally, I'm stuck with them until I can find a better solution. 

[dan.stevenson · Accepted solution]

I decided to give it one more shot and finally came up with a solution. Maybe this will help someone else trying to implement a similar setup. Even though the RV320 does not allow anything other than a class C 255.255.255.0 subnet in the network setup page it does allow greater than class C subnets in the VPN setup page.

I created another subnet in the network setup page for our wireless devices on the 192.168.1.x network, ignoring VLAN and inter VLAN routing completely. I also reverted back to my original DHCP settings so that my DHCP server is giving out addresses in the 192.168.1.x range again.

I also enabled RIP in the advanced routing page (although I'm not sure if this was needed, I have not tested without it yet).

Then I modified the subnet masks for the office LAN in the VPN setup in both routers to open it up to a class B subnet 255.255.254.0. I can now ping any device from either side of the tunnel and I have the entire 192.168.1.x network range to use for all our wireless devices.