Skip to main content

Training Lab Connectivity

More
18 years 10 months ago #10914 by Inferno

So you want all the users off of the Cisco to be on 192.168.100.0 and all the users off of the Netgear to be on 192.168.100.0


Maybe I misinterpreted that to mean put them all in the .100.0 range? :?

2.) If you make the two VLANs on the Cisco you will have two different networks.


Another thing I said was that I didn't want two VLANs on one switch, there's no need because I want to keep all of the hosts off of one particular switch in the same subnet, however, different than the other switch. That's why I said to forget about the VLAN aspect part of this situation and just use the default VLAN 1 for now on each.

Have you read the firewall.cx articles on routing and VLANs? They are very good.


No.

I am getting the feeling that you feel like this is a mundane issue, but you have not yet given me a suitable answer. Please don't inconvenience yourself with this if it is bothersome, it is only a training lab set up.

Again...for those who have time and patience to understand completely.

Hmm, maybe I was just a little unclear in my first post.

I'll start from the outside again and move in towards the net gateway. I've got a Cisco 3560 Catalyst Switch plugged into a Netgear Switch and the Netgear plugged into the Internet Gateway. I have computers off of both switches. The Hosts off of the Netgear obviously have connectivity because they are the first hop to the net. They are utilyzing 192.168.10.0 network. The computers off of the Cisco are utilyzing 192.168.100.0 network. I am trying to get those computers to talk to the computers on the Netgear as well as connect to the internet. Is this possible utilyzing the layer 3 switching capabilities of the Cisco? I might have to switch the position of the two switches as well and make the Cisco the middle switch. Lets forget about the VLAN aspect for now.


One network/subnet per switch, hosts on each connecting to internet through the other switch. Switch1 to Switch2 to Internet Gateway. Switch2 can currently reach the net, switch one however does not have connectivity.
More
18 years 10 months ago #10915 by jwj
Replied by jwj on topic Re: Training Lab Connectivity
I am not going to continue to help you if you continue to try to insuate things like I consider your problem mundane. This forum lacks trolling, which is a very good thing. All my suggestions were to help you, and if you had followed my step by step configuration steps in a previous post it would have been fixed already. You can try to spin things to make it seem like I don't know what I'm talking about, but I would recommend you just carefully re-read my replies and the articles on VLANs and routing on this site. I will just respond to your first quote from me by saying it was a typo, I added an extra zero. Shame on me!

Have a good day.

-Jeremy-
More
18 years 10 months ago #11020 by TheBishop
As jwj said earlier in this thread:

I'm going to make a sample configuration and drawing for you to clear things up. I'm busy at work, so I'll get this done later today.

I think it's worth pointing out that everyone who donates valuable time answering questions on firewall.cx also has the demands of a life and day job.
As such, I have the greatest respect for everyone who takes the time and trouble to help in these forums
More
18 years 10 months ago #11026 by DaLight
I agree. But as I've been closely following this thread, I would like to see it finished off nicely. Please jwj and Inferno ...
More
18 years 10 months ago #11030 by jwj
Replied by jwj on topic Re: Training Lab Connectivity
Here's the finisher. Now I wouldn't recommend this configuration because I think VLANs are awesome things, but if you are adamently against their use than this can be done.

The Catalyst 3560 is a switch. All of it's ports, by default, are switchports. Let's say the Netgear switch, with it's users on 192.168.10.0, is connected to fa0/1 on the Cisco 3560. Users off of the Cisco 3560 are to be on 192.168.100.0.

Interface fa0/1 configuration steps:

cisco#config term
cisco(config)#interface fa0/1
cisco(config-if)#no switchport
cisco(config-if)#ip address 192.168.10.1 255.255.255.0
cisco(config-if)#no shutdown

This makes fa0/1 a routable interface. I'm going to apply the default gateway ip address for the 192.168.100.0 network interface vlan 1 because by default, Cisco switchports are on Vlan1. If it's a switchport, it's on a VLAN, important to remember that.

Interface Vlan1 configuration steps:

cisco(config-if)#interface Vlan1
cisco(config-if)#ip address 192.168.100.0 255.255.240.0
cisco(config-if)#no shutdown

Now we have two interfaces for your routing protocol to use for forwarding. This time I'll use EIGRP as an example since it's better than RIP. I also forgot to mention in my last config example that you need to enable routing on this switch.

EIGRP Routing configuration steps:

cisco(config-if)#exit
cisco(config)#ip routing
cisco(config)#router eigrp 168
cisco(config-router)#network 192.168.0.0
cisco(config-router)#ctrl+z
cisco#write memory

That is all that needs to be done except make sure your hosts have as their default gateway either 192.168.10.1 or 192.168.100.1, dependant on what network they are on.

-Jeremy-
More
18 years 10 months ago #11057 by Inferno
Well thanks "TheBishop",I don't think anyone here realized that. Way to get yourself onto this thread.

JWJ: This forum lacks trolling? Meaning moderators to tattle to? Gimme a break, get some thicker skin.

I was just saying, if you're going to treat me like a kid in his basement and refer me to articles, while granted they might be good, aren't relevant to the situation, then don't worry about helping me. As you can tell from my post about the "Extra 0" you put in, I am obviously paying very close attention to what you have to say on the topic. While I have said nothing about you "not knowing what you're talking about", I find it funny that you got defensive about that. I simply stated in so many words, that not only will your original solution not work, it wans't even my intent. It was close but not exactly what I was trying to do, which is why I restated exactly what my intentions were for you and anyone else with knowledge on Layer 3 Switching.

Unfortunately I wont be able to try this latest solution attempt until next week because of a business trip. I will let you all know how it works when I get back.
Time to create page: 0.135 seconds