AC86U OpenVPN server whilst in AP mode

[Blankedy]

Hi all,

I have an RT-AC86U (running the latest stable Merlin fw for it) that was the primary router on my home network (i.e. doing DHCP), but has now been relegated to a wireless AP as it couldn't handle the newly installed 900/900 connection. The new ISP-provided router is fast enough for the new connection (as you'd expect), but the software does not allow for any sort of VPN server to be configured. I would like to still run the OpenVPN server on the AC86U behind the ISP router.

I can access the OpenVPN configuration page despite it not appearing in the UI whilst in AP mode by going to its standard URL. I have port forwarded from the ISP router to the AC86U, and I can successfully connect to the OpenVPN server from the WAN side. However, I cannot address other devices on my home network or the internet on the client device. Can I - and if so, how - configure the OpenVPN server/AC86U to ask the ISP router to assign IPs to clients (and/or generally send traffic between the two)? Or more generally: what are my options, if any, for the desired outcome? I am technical, but do not understand a whole lot of the network stack, apologies.

This thread isn't entirely to do with the Merlin fw, so please move if more appropriate elsewhere.

Thanks

 

[L&LD]

Welcome to the forums @Blankedy.

It can't route (a VPN) when not in router mode.

You may want to use it in a double NAT setup (and forward the appropriate port from the main router too).

 

[Tech9]

I have an RT-AC86U... it couldn't handle the newly installed 900/900 connection

RT-AC86U can handle Gigabit ISP. You have to make sure Runner and Flow Cache are enabled.

 

[Blankedy]

Welcome to the forums @Blankedy.

It can't route (a VPN) when not in router mode.

You may want to use it in a double NAT setup (and forward the appropriate port from the main router too).

OK, so double NAT is the only way? Bummer. Thanks!

RT-AC86U can handle Gigabit ISP. You have to make sure Runner and Flow Cache are enabled.

A-ha, I'll have a look, thanks - returning it to routing duty would just solve the problem.