Can't remote access router... different subnet/mask the problem?

thebeans33

Prominent
Nov 9, 2017
6
0
510
Howdy all.

I need to be able to remotely access a D-Link DWR-922. This is a 4g LTE router provided by US Cellular and it is currently operating off of a SIM card.

I have enabled the remote access function and specified a port number but am unable to connect or even ping the device from an external IP (I've also enabled WAN Ping).

Here's the weird thing. The public IP address listed in the GUI is NOT the address I get if I go to a page such as "whatismyip.com". They're not even similar.

The IP address the device (currently, as it changes on every reboot) GUI gives me begins as 100.83.x.x

The IP address I get from whatismyip is 166.181.x.x
Interestingly enough, the DNS servers also start with 166.181. but then 2 different subnets.

Finally, the subnet mask is listed as 255.255.255.224

^I am unable to alter any of the above.

Can anyone explain what's going on here and tell me how I might be able to get this working?
 
Solution
You need them to assign you a public ip. Does no good to assign you a "static" ip if it is still a private ip. Some companies technically can't because of how they set things up. Others charge a lot of money to have a public ip address.

The 100.83.x.x block is really the same as the 192.168 or 10.x.x.x ip addresses. Many cell companies used 10.x.x.x ip but it caused issue because a number of people used those for their lan ip. Part of the 100.x.x.x block was then allocated as private ip to be used by ISP rather than end users. There technically is nothing stopping someone from using the 100.x.x.x ip addresses in their house if their ISP is not using them.....but it is simpler to just use the 192.168 addresses for most people...
To a point I am even surprise that the router has settings that allow access from the wan when using mobile broadband.

If you had looked that 100.83.x.x ip address up you would have found it is part of a block of ip addresses used for carrier nat. It is actually a somewhat new block of addresses they made private because of the increased demand for ip by the mobile broadband.

Because you have no ability to do port forwarding on the ISP router that is doing the NAT there is no way to access your router or your internal machines from internet devices directly.
 

thebeans33

Prominent
Nov 9, 2017
6
0
510
I had a feeling this was the case, it just stepped a bit outside of my networking knowledge. I am in discussions with a rep about getting a static IP (I am currently just testing for a project I'm rolling out)... would it be safe to assume they would be aware of this issue and it would be rectified with static info?
 

thebeans33

Prominent
Nov 9, 2017
6
0
510
And just to clarify that I'm following you correctly... US Cellular is assigning me an external IP but in reality is assigning the router a different, sort of "internal" IP and routing traffic to it?
 
You need them to assign you a public ip. Does no good to assign you a "static" ip if it is still a private ip. Some companies technically can't because of how they set things up. Others charge a lot of money to have a public ip address.

The 100.83.x.x block is really the same as the 192.168 or 10.x.x.x ip addresses. Many cell companies used 10.x.x.x ip but it caused issue because a number of people used those for their lan ip. Part of the 100.x.x.x block was then allocated as private ip to be used by ISP rather than end users. There technically is nothing stopping someone from using the 100.x.x.x ip addresses in their house if their ISP is not using them.....but it is simpler to just use the 192.168 addresses for most people since that is what devices are set to by default.
 
Solution