Technicolor TG589vac DHCP Issue

This is the router/modem supplied by SSE. Not a bad little box, for an ISP-supplied router.

However, ran into an interesting problem when trying to use an old BT HG612 modem front facing a PFSense box, and the 589 as a wifi AP.

The 589 - obviously - can act as a DHCP server, specifiying the DHCP pool, DNS servers, and a number of static/reserved addresses. Notice anything missing from that list? Yep, the default gateway. It appears that the 589 assumes that its IP address is the default gateway, and there is no means to change the gateway to something other than the 589's IP address.

Does anyone know different?

My network is 192.168.1.0/24, the PFSense LAN port has the address 192.168.1.1 and is the default gateway. PFSense was acting as a DHCP server, with the 589's DHCP server disabled. WAN IP is picked up via DHCP from SSE over a PPoE connection.

PFSense acts as DHCP server

ISP->HG612->(WAN port) PFSENSE (LAN port) ->Netgear GS105 switch

Netgear GS105 port 1 -> PF Sense
Netgear GS105 port 2 -> Dell 2816 switch
Netgear GS105 port 3 -> Netgear GS805 switch
Netgear GS105 port 1 -> (switch port 1) 589 ->wifi

I can hard code IP configuration on most devices to use 192.168.1.1

In this configuration, all wired clients pickup an IP address, communicate with each other, and can reach the internet. However, wireless clients do not pickup IP configuration.

I assumed that with disabling the 589s DHCP server, wireless clients would pick up an address from the PFSense box, but this doesn't happen; presumably the 589 is blocking DHCP requests.

I tried setting up DHCP server with a small pool on the 589 - and adjusted the PFSense pool size accordingly, which is when I discovered the 589 apparently only serve's its address as the default gateway.

I tried using the 589s WAN port to connect to the Netgear switch, but this made no difference. I'm wondering why, as that is supposedly the port to use if one wishes to use a different modem, and woudl therefore be looking for a WAN-side DHCP assigned IP address. Perhaps I need to examine that in more detail.

Any ideas, or suggestions to try?

edit: for clarity.

Edited by alewis (Sat 08-Jul-17 19:43:32)

You can only have one dhcp server on a network

Actually, you can have more than one. Anyway, it isn't germane to the problem(s), which are

1. The 589 seems to have a crippled DHCP implementation that assumes *it* is always the default gateway, with no way of specifying a different address

2. The 589 is not passing DHCP/BOOTP requests over the network; which makes me wonder if it is switching or routing packets between the LAN and WLAN interfaces.

Oddly enough, specifying /?debug=1 on the url to access to router offers 5 extra config pages, and opens up more details on the WAN port. I'm now thinking that maybe I need to connect to the PFsense box via that port, presumably that will pickup a DHCP assigned address, and set up a static route to the PFSense box as the default gateway.

You could activate the PPPOE server in pFsense and use the TG589vac WAN port to connect. This would setup a different network to satisfy the condition that you can only have one DHCP server on a network.

It's a second-to-last resort, as I stated earlier. I'd really like to know why on earth the 589's DHCP server is crippled though!

BTW- there is no single-DHCP server per network limitation. Split DHCP is just that, two (or more) DHCP servers on the same network, each with a different pool of addresses in the same subnet. e.g. server1's pool is 192.168.1.100 to 1.149, server2's pool is 192.168.1.150 to 1.199

I'm sorry I can't answer why. I was attempting to answer this

In reply to a post by alewis:

Any ideas, or suggestions to try?

Oh don't get me wrong - the problem with non-verbal communication is that the non-verbal clues to context are missing, such as a friendly tone and a smile!

Your thoughts regarding using the PPoE server mirror mine, which I'll try tomorrow; having the 589 front-ending the PF box isn't ideal, but is a workaround if it works.

Another 'thought' is using the spare LAN port (OPT1) on the PF box to connect the 598, and running the WLAN on a different subnet.

Maybe I should have said something like "as a rule of thumb I like to think that you should only have one DHCP server on a subnet in the interests of simplicity, rather than try to delve into the complexities of bootp etc, which I don't really understand"

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/threads/technicolo...

There is a guy on this forum that claims to know a lot about this specific router, should you not get answers here you might want to give him a ring. His name is NickDJ.

Or you may find the info you need on his website.

http://www.nickdj.co.uk/internet-routers/router-guid...

Good luck!

Post deleted by panda