I worked something out in my head, but I am having a hard time putting this into practice.

We own 2 units, both within 100m of each other. Both units have internet connectivity, but there is a single server in 1 of the units that needs to be accessible to people in the other also. VPN/Fibre isnt an option as the speed just isnt there.

What I theorised is as follows

  1. Cisco RV325 in Unit 1, serving the offices there, and hosting the server (192.168.1.x)

  2. Cisco RV345 in Unit 2, serving the offices and workshop (192.168.2.x)

Joining these together, allowing the subnets to talk to each other. I dont NEED subnets, but I imagined this would allow me to keep the internet connectivity seperate. I have read a lot of conflicting reports on whether or not this is possible, so my question is - Is it possible? Am I trying to achieve something that cannot be done?

  • Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you can post and accept your own answer. – Ron Maupin Dec 17 '20 at 22:46

Yes, it can be done, but the physical connection between the devices will be the hardest part. For Ethernet, you need a total distance (including patch cords of less than 100m. You must also pay attention to any building codes or regulations regarding wiring between units.

You can assign a subnet for the link between the routers and create static routes on each router to allow the subnets to talk with each other.

  • Ok, so im not in the realms of impossibility. The 100m was an exaggeration, the closest points of the 2 buildings are less than 30m apart, I have been tempted to throw some Cat5 between them, but I am still finding out if I am allowed to. I have a set of ubiquiti nanobeams which are not being put to use, but thats going to throw more complexity into the mix i guess? I am not 100% sure how they work. – Jon Bunce Oct 23 '20 at 14:15

Basically, you've got three options, from best to worst:

  1. Run a physical connection between the routers. Set up dynamic routing or create static routes to the remote network. Based on the distance, you'll need to use fiber. This is the fastest option, easily providing gigabit speed. [edit] With a smaller distance, you could use Cat-5 as well, provided that the cable is protected from freezing - Cat-5 cables don't take that well. Also, check out local regulations for necessary cable grades and protection.
  2. Set up VPN between the routers, providing a secure tunnel across the Internet. Set up routing as above. Speed will be limited by the VPN router capabilities and your Internet links.
  3. Expose the server to the Internet using destination NAT aka reverse NAT aka port forwarding. Limit access to the public IP address of Unit 2. Point Unit 2 users to the Unit 1's public IP instead of the server's private IP (e.g. using DNS). Note that this option provides no additional security that the server connection doesn't already provide, ie. the server connection must provide the required security by itself.

Connect both units with cat cable (copper cable ) physically and configure L3 interfàce at both units devices and You can allow both units to talk to each other by allowing static route configuration on both units devices allowing both units to talk to each other . As it is 100m length you can use copper cable if traffic experience any latency then use fiber cable by using media convertors at both ends

Internet connectivity don't have any impact post doing this configuration ..

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.