| Author |
I feel like a dunce asking this....
|
|
|
| I have a class b network with 26 bits of masking with e0 on my router belonging to that subnet. When I set up a class c private IP address NT box I can't see the freaking class b/26 network from it. I have tried setting static routes on the NT box using the "route add" command but I just lose more hair  Of course when I give it one the class b /26 addresses it works fine. I ran in to the same problem with my spare 2500 when I gave it's E0 a class c private IP address. Am I missing some thing here or should I call A1 truck driving school? | |
|
| Why don't you show us the numbers? And, is the NT box supposed to reside on the subnet attached to e0?
(BTW, do you know what "NT" means? Neanderthal Technology  )
Cheers!
| |
|
| Sorry about that.. The class b is 158.76.237.64/26 and the class C is 192.168.0.2/24. The placement of the NT box is not as important as to why I can't ping the class b/26 subnet. I put a class c/24 address on the router's E0 int to see if my NT box was working properly | |
|
| Maybe I'm getting this wrong, but just to make sure, is this what you're trying to do?
<NT>pvt net------class B<Router>
That is, are you trying to put both networks on the same "wire" (broadcast domain)?
If not, I apologize in advance
/creamy | |
|
| quote:
Originally posted by whytokayok:
<snip>
The placement of the NT box is not as important as to why I can't ping the class b/26 subnet.
<snip>
Is too. It's hard to figure out the solution, if you know only half of the problem...
[This message has been edited by dmaftei (edited 02-13-2001).] | |
|
| If I've got it right
Router E0-158.76.237.64/26
NT Box -192.168.0.2/24
The NT is on the same wire as E0, if this is right then you would be able to ping each other. Your on a diff network, If you create a sub-interface on e0 (the interface will have to be a Fastethernet) and give a 192 address it will work.
Kevin. | |
|
| I'm still confused about your setup...
---------------------------------------
First: As far as I can tell, you have assigned the subnet address xxx.64(host= all 0's) to e0 on your router, this is a big nono.
-----------------------------------------
If you want to "force" two interfaces on different subnets residing on the same wire to communicate, you can set a static interface route on both interfaces. AFAIK you can't do this on an NT box, though.
Example : (Router2 would be your NT machine. However, I'm using IOS commands since I don't think this is possible on NT)
Router1
---------
ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.255.0 e0
Router2
---------
ip route 158.76.237.64 255.255.255.192 e0
As to why you would want to do this, I can only speculate...
/creamy
[This message has been edited by creamy_stew (edited 02-13-2001).]
[This message has been edited by creamy_stew (edited 02-13-2001).] | |
|
| Putting the class b and the class c on the same wire is what I'm playing around with. This is not a permanment thing. Just wanted to see if two diffrent class and or subnets can see each other sharing a common connections on the EO side of my main router. By the wayThe x.x.x.64 is not address of the router e0 port it's actually .65.... I was showing that address just as one would show 15.0.0.0 as being a class a network. I guess what every one is saying is that a static route must be set up between both networks in order for communications to take place. I'll give it another try. Static routes can be added to the NT route table buy using the route add command.
| |
|
| Hi whytokayok!
I know I can set a static route using e.g.
route add 10.0.0.0 mask 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.1
The problem is you need to use an interface as a gateway instead of a next hop router (192.168.0.1 in this case). If this is possible under NT, could you please post how to do it?
/creamy | |
|
| Creamy,
I can add another IP address to the interface card in the NT machine but that defeats the pupose of trying to save an class b address. Other than adding a second interface card, I can't figure out any other way to do it at the moment. By the way, I tried adding a second address to my router E0 port to see if it could server as two default gateways and it locked up ... | |
|
| If I understand you right you're trying to have 2 distinct networks run on the same network segment, this is tecnically not possible due to the fact that a router's interface can only have 1 physical IP address which would determine the base network (subnet) for that segment if there's a network device on that segment with an IP address that does not fall within the segments IP address range it will not be able to communicate with any other devices on that segment. This is due to the fact that in your case
Router E0-158.76.237.65/26
Network address is 158.76.237.64 and the broadcast would be 158.76.237.127
and the NT Box -192.168.0.2/24
would be on network 192.168.0.0 and the broadcast would be 192.168.0.255
Neither of these devices would see the other since they discard anything (including broadcasts) that is not on their respective networks.
Now if the Router has 2 different interfaces you could easily have Interface E0 be 158.76.237.65/26 and have Interface E1 be 192.168.0.1/24 and the NT box could easily be 192.168.0.2/24 with a default gateway of 192.168.0.1 and ping either of those interfaces and the result would accomplish your objective of connecting the NT box to the router as well as saving (or not using) the class B ip address. This would also allow you to have another 250+ devices on that 192.x segment and not use a single class b address while maintaining connectivity...
I hope this helps... Although I'm sure you already knew this... :^)
------------------
Thanks...
-Mike CCNA, Net+ | |
|
| whytokayok,
Did you try creating a sub-interface on your interface before adding your IP Address, another option is to create a sec IP address on the same interface. However I've never tried with diff classes of IP address.
Kevin | |
|
| I haven't tried the sub interface thing yet. But it's next. I did give e0 a secondary IP address of 192.... Here is what I got. I can ping from a 158 NT box to the 158 E0 address and I can ping the 192 E0 address from the 192 NT box. Also, from the router I can ping both the 158 and the 192 NT boxes. I just can't get the freaking 158 and 192 NT boxes to cross the router and ping each other. I wish I did have two E0 ports, but Cisco does allow for multiple IPs on a single interface. | |
|
| Well, that's where the sub-interface should come in. I can't see a reason why it won't, it just like interVlan routing at the end of the end but without the isl encap. Which is good because I take it the interface is only 10mb. Give it a go, I bet it works.
Kevin. | |
|
| I'll try the sub-interface command Sunday When I get back to work,,,,,, I think I probably need to set up static routes to tell the router what to do with the packets... | |
|
| Yes try that, that should work.
Kevin | |
|
| You don't need a subinterface, just add this:
ip address 192.168.x.x 255.255.255.0 secondary
to your ethernet. Sorry couldn't remember the address block you are using but you get the picture
Yankee | |
|
| I added ip routes and the two address to the E0 interface (using the secondary command )but still could not get the two boxes to cross the router. I did find out the hard way that E0 cannot be configured with sub-interfaces unless it is part of an Vlan. This is what the message said.....
****Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that
subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10 or ISL vLAN****
I'm just wondering if I the 2500 can even route on the secondary address... I'm not giving up on this one this easy.. | |
|
| Well I've put sub interface's on without using Vlan and I've never seen that reply before, have you updated the IOS and are you using IP Plus software on the routers as well.
Kevin. | |
|
| The 25xx series router can use the secondary addresses. We do it more often then we should....
Make sure your subnet masks are correct and that you have the default gateway (on your hosts)properly set for that secondary address used on the router.
Yankee | |
|
| When I was driving in to work this morning, I was thinking about Sec IP Address's. It should work follow Yankee advice and try again.
Kevin. | |
|
| quote:
Originally posted by Yankee
The 25xx series router can use the secondary addresses. We do it more often then we should....
Tsk tsk tsk. Poor network design.... 
But at least you recognize the fact.
MadChef | |
|
| Unfortunately secondary addresses can become a necessity for some types of firewall exemptions when your primary network uses private addresses.
I didn't design it, just tryin to help fix it up
Yankee | |
|
| OK.... I have done every freaking thing I can do to get this to work!!! This is not being done to put on the network. This is being done as a matter of "What if..."
I have the subnets, default gateways and everything else configured properly. Second, I don't think Ethernet ports can be configured as sub-interfaces unless they are part of an Vlan as the error message stated... I tried to configure my 3640's FA 0/0 as an sub interface and it came back with the error message similar to the 2500;
"Configuring IP routing on a LAN subinterface is only allowed if that
subinterface is already configured as part of an IEEE 802.10, IEEE 802.1Q, or IS
L vLAN."
Back to the original problem, I even tried to set this experiment up on the 3640 and it would not route the NT class b/26 and class c/24 boxes across the router (IP classless and IP subnet Zero is enabled). I would like to see some one else give this a shot if they can... As it stands, I don't think it can be done on a Cisco Router via the Ethernet port.... Please someone prove me wrong | |
|
| Well what can I say, Both me and Yankee have done things like this before. So we need to start looking at IOS and what software your running on the routers. I'll try and do some homework for you if you'll find out this info for me. Deal.
Kevin. | |
|
| Deal
On my 2500 router I am running IOS 11.2
Om my 3640 I'm running IOS Version 12.1(5)T4
What else you need???? | |
|
| I need to know what software your running on the routers, i.e IP, IP Plus, infact I just need to know which one.
Thanks
Kevin. | |
|
| No!! Thank you.....
I am running IP on both. I do not have IP plus nor have I played around with it. Maybe it's something I need to look into |
|
|
|