RV340 and multiple WAN IP addresses

[jec6613]

I currently have a single RV340 router, which will be rolled out to replace a small fleet of the now discontinued Netgear VPN routers.  The configuration works very well, except that we have one location (where the servers sit) where there are multiple WAN IP addresses handed off from the ISP - five, to be precise.  I cannot seem to figure out where to input secondary WAN IP addresses for it to handle the servers behind it.

Does anybody have any ideas?

Thanks!

[marioesp]

Greetings,

what kind of setting are you trying to do? the other IP will be handle by an internal server?

you can try to set One-to-One NAT or DMZ network too. but, let me know a little more about how are you going to use the Public IPs.

[russfell1]

Mario,

Your suggestions are not very helpful.  The issue is quite clear and common.  The ISP assigns you a block of 5 usable IPs, with a CIDR block of /29 aka 255.255.255.248 which has 8 IPs.  The ISP uses one for the device and one as the gateway with another as the broadcast.  This leaves 5 usable IP addresses. 

SO, the question is how do you configure the WAN IP to be able to use all 5 addresses?   

[agekov]

   Hello @russfell1, 

My name is Anton and I am part of the Cisco SMB Support Team. 

Could you check if creating WAN sub-interfaces will provide usability of all extra IP addresses?

You can view below how to configure sub-interfaces on WAN:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4g_AeSLCufA

Kind Regards!

[russfell1]

Thanks for the suggestion. I will try this next time I’m in the office. I don’t want to try remotely, as I may get locked out.

The video says to use DHCP, which would not work in my case, although I do see an option for static IP configuration.

I’ll update, when possible.

Regards,
—Russ

[jec6613]

It does not.  Sub-interfaces require a VLAN tag, and you can't set one up without one.  So, for instance, WAN1.1 is tagged VLAN1 as it leaves the WAN interface.  Without some piece of hardware in between to remove the VLAN tag, it won't function.

This is fine for some classical routing situations, but isn't a true secondary IP on the WAN port, and doesn't solve my issue.

Additionally, the One to One NAT option only works if the RV340 is handling the gateway to that VLAN - if you have an additional router behind the RV340 (a L3/L4 switch in my case) you cannot route through that, so it doesn't work for me.

For now, the secondary IP that is critical to have on that device I just ran to WAN2, but that's a kludge at best.

[Doitjust4fun]

There has got to be a way to do this simple thing.  Cisco support, Please advise.  We shouldn't have to pay for a service contract to get this basic functionality working. The video is insufficient.  It is like a route is missing or something even though I see the new sub-interface in the route table.  ACLs and Port Forwards using WAN1.1 as the interface do not work!