Logon/Administrate a modem in bridge mode??

Hi all,
Is it possible to get access to a modem set up in bridge mode for admin/monitoring purposes?
I have the following setup on a Talk talk llu adsl2+ service.
A BT Voyager 190 running Dynalink RTA1320 firmware in full bridge mode. It's local IP address is set to 192.168.1.1 but I'm not sure that's relevant in bridge mode??
This is Connected to a Asus RT-AC66U which is serving my LAN, DHCP, NAT etc. with a LAN address of 192.168.0.1
It's all working OK but I'd like to be able to
1. Monitor my adsl connection; sync speed, noise figures etc. and
2. Login to and manage the modem while it's online.
Is this possible? If so how?

I also have the TT supplied D-Link ADSL 2780 set up the same for comparison purposes.

Any advice greatly appreciated.
Regards
Clive

With the BT 2700 hub running in bridge mode it sets an IP address of 192.168.1.254 . Provided the local network is set with a suitable IP range 192.168.1.xxx and subnet 255.255.255.0 then it is easy to access the 2700.

In your case you are using 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.0.xxx - can you change you LAN addressing to use the 192.168.1.xxx range, selecting say .111 for the ASUS and the DHCP allocatable block at 192.168.1.160 to 200. You will then be able to access the Voyager.

A trick I use when doing reviews of bridge mode hardware is to unplug the Internet connection, which sometimes makes it easier to see the configuration interface

Thanks guys. Think I need to redesign my lan ip setup.
Nice trick MrSaffron but I really want to be able to get at it while the network is up and running.
Thanks again guys.

So long as a subnet of 255.255.255.0 is used there should be no issues with 192.168.1.x and 192.168.0.x

Have seen some routers that are not so clever and have problems though with these ranges.

Actually, there will with that subnet mask. You need 255.255.254.0

You mis-understand 255.255.255.0 is correct if you want the 1.x and 0.x ranges to be handled with one on the LAN side and one on the WAN side.

using 255.255.254.0 would cause confusion between LAN/WAN routing for these particular IP blocks

There's no way 192.168.x.x will be on the WAN side.

He means on the WAN side of a device, the router, not the WAN side of the whole caboodle..

Ah, ok - looks like there's double-NAT being recommended.