|
Home > Archive > alt.certification.cisco > May 2003 > One subnet on different physical locations
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
One subnet on different physical locations
|
|
| Atif Sajid 2003-05-21, 2:24 pm |
| Dear group members,
I need your expert advice on this issue. I have a subnet 10.241.7.0/24 that
is running on location A. On location B, I have to install a PC that
should belong to the same subnet. Between location A and B is unknown
number of routers and running EIGRP. What is the best way to resolve this
in order to overcome any routing issues. Please let me know if someone has
implemented this.
Thanks
Atif
| |
| Walter Roberson 2003-05-21, 5:24 pm |
| In article <4dQya.30207$XV1.20879@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
Atif Sajid <atif.sajid@verizon.net> wrote:
:I need your expert advice on this issue. I have a subnet 10.241.7.0/24 that
:is running on location A. On location B, I have to install a PC that
:should belong to the same subnet. Between location A and B is unknown
:number of routers and running EIGRP. What is the best way to resolve this
:in order to overcome any routing issues. Please let me know if someone has
:implemented this.
Diego Balgera asked essentially the same question just yesterday.
Repeating my answer:
Transparent Bridging
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td...rpc_r/53998.htm
--
Can a statement be self-referential without knowing it?
| |
|
| "Walter Roberson" <roberson@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message
news:bagtfa$jh2$1@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca...
> In article <4dQya.30207$XV1.20879@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>,
> Atif Sajid <atif.sajid@verizon.net> wrote:
> :I need your expert advice on this issue. I have a subnet 10.241.7.0/24
that
> :is running on location A. On location B, I have to install a PC that
> :should belong to the same subnet. Between location A and B is unknown
> :number of routers and running EIGRP. What is the best way to resolve
this
> :in order to overcome any routing issues. Please let me know if someone
has
> :implemented this.
>
> Diego Balgera asked essentially the same question just yesterday.
> Repeating my answer:
>
> Transparent Bridging
>
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td...3/rpc_r/53998.h
tm
> --
> Can a statement be self-referential without knowing it?
If the need is simply a small number of devices that need to keep their old
IP addresses (for whatever reason) being located somewhere else (where that
subnet is not present), LAN Mobility is an excellent solution. It doesn't
force bridging or other topology change that can have undesirable
consequences. The negative is that a host route appears in your routing
table for each misplaced IP address, so it doesn't scale real well.
| |
| bmwjason 2003-05-27, 2:24 pm |
| IP/IP tunnelling could work as well, me thinks, although I've not tried it.
You'd want the 'remote' pc(s) all in one subnet (i.e. in a /28 subnet, for
example) so that one static route pointing to the tunnel would carry the
traffic between the two.
But I have to ask, why does it need to belong to the same subnet?
Jason.
"Atif Sajid" <atif.sajid@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:4dQya.30207$XV1.20879@nwrdny03.gnilink.net...
> Dear group members,
> I need your expert advice on this issue. I have a subnet 10.241.7.0/24
that
> is running on location A. On location B, I have to install a PC that
> should belong to the same subnet. Between location A and B is unknown
> number of routers and running EIGRP. What is the best way to resolve this
> in order to overcome any routing issues. Please let me know if someone
has
> implemented this.
>
> Thanks
>
> Atif
>
>
| |
|
| "bmwjason" <bmwjason@kc.rr.com> wrote in message news:<qfOAa.25918$ek2.380815@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com>...
> IP/IP tunnelling could work as well, me thinks, although I've not tried it.
> You'd want the 'remote' pc(s) all in one subnet (i.e. in a /28 subnet, for
> example) so that one static route pointing to the tunnel would carry the
> traffic between the two.
>
> But I have to ask, why does it need to belong to the same subnet?
>
> Jason.
> "Atif Sajid" <atif.sajid@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:4dQya.30207$XV1.20879@nwrdny03.gnilink.net...
> > Dear group members,
> > I need your expert advice on this issue. I have a subnet 10.241.7.0/24
> that
> > is running on location A. On location B, I have to install a PC that
> > should belong to the same subnet. Between location A and B is unknown
> > number of routers and running EIGRP. What is the best way to resolve this
> > in order to overcome any routing issues. Please let me know if someone
> has
> > implemented this.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Atif
> >
> >
Hi,
Try mobile IP. Like before, I haven't tried it myself. It is a
solution by Cisco for maintaining the same IP address and other TCP/IP
properties, while moving to other subnets.
Thanks,
Deepu.
|
|
|
|
|