routing parts of a Class B

Thread View: comp.dcom.sys.cisco

3 messages

[T] Back to Threads [V] Tree View [G] Group Articles

3 total messages Started by Tod Pike Wed, 12 Sep 1990 14:11

#671

Author: Tod Pike
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 1990 14:11

31 lines
1585 bytes

I've been struggling with what appears to be a simple problem, but have had
no luck.  I have a class B subnet being routed out one interface of my Cisco
box.  A portion of my organization (who have a dedicated range of class C
subnets of my network) would like to have their own wire.  I would like to
route only their portions of my class B out a separate interface, leaving
the rest of my numbers routed out the normal interface.  A diagram might help:

            Internet
                |
	|-----------------|
	|    Ether 0      |
	|                 |
	|   Cisco  Ether 1|-128.237.0.0
	|                 |
	|    Ether 2      |
	|-----------------|
	        |
	   128.237.X.0

The only way I can see to do this is to define Ethernet 1 as a class C subnet
and use secondary lines for all of my other class C portions.  Then we define
Ethernet 2 as another class C subnet, with the appropriate netmasks.  If anyone
can see a better way to do this, I'd appreciate hearing from them!

			Tod Pike

-- 
Internet: tgp@sei.cmu.edu
Mail:     Carnegie Mellon University
	  Software Engineering Institute
	  Pittsburgh, PA. 15213-3980

Re: routing parts of a Class B

#677

Author: Kent England
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 1990 16:17

33 lines
2121 bytes

In article <8560@fy.sei.cmu.edu> tgp@sei.cmu.edu (Tod Pike) writes:

>...  I have a class B subnet being routed out one interface of my Cisco
>box.  A portion of my organization (who have a dedicated range of class C
>subnets of my network) would like to have their own wire.  I would like to
>route only their portions of my class B out a separate interface, leaving
>the rest of my numbers routed out the normal interface.

	I think you mean to say you have a class B with eight bits of
subnet.  I think you want to have a single class B network, two cable
segments, and an arbitrary number of eight-bit subnets on each cable,
but you don't really want to subnet any more than necessary to support
the two cable segments.

	You can't have a single class B subnetted on one interface and
not subnetted on the other (from the point of view of the router).
The net is either subnetted or not.  If you subnet, you can layer
subnets on the same wire (interface) using cisco's secondary interface
capability.

	If you don't want to use subnetting in the router, but just
want two cable segments, you can place this router onto the net with
one interface and link the two ethernet segments together with an
external bridge and route IP.  This assumes the router is just an
interface to some external TCP/IP network.  Otherwise, run the router
as the bridge and don't route IP for your class B for now.

	I think you should plan on future subnets as you grow, so you
might decide to use secondary interfaces from the start, even though
it doesn't seem worth it right now.  At least assign host addresses as
though they might be subnetted in future.

	--Kent

Re: routing parts of a Class B

#678

Author: Kent England
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 1990 16:17

33 lines
2205 bytes

In article <8560@fy.sei.cmu.edu> tgp@sei.cmu.edu (Tod Pike) writes:

>...  I have a class B subnet being routed out one interface of my Cisco
>box.  A portion of my organization (who have a dedicated range of class C
>subnets of my network) would like to have their own wire.  I would like to
>route only their portions of my class B out a separate interface, leaving
>the rest of my numbers routed out the normal interface.

	I think you mean to say you have a class B with eight bits of
subnet.  I think you want to have a single class B network, two cable
segments, and an arbitrary number of eight-bit subnets on each cable,
but you don't really want to subnet any more than necessary to support
the two cable segments.

	You can't have a single class B subnetted on one interface and
not subnetted on the other (from the point of view of the router).
The net is either subnetted or not.  If you subnet, you can layer
subnets on the same wire (interface) using cisco's secondary interface
capability.

	If you don't want to use subnetting in the router, but just
want two cable segments, you can place this router onto the net with
one interface and link the two ethernet segments together with an
external bridge and route IP.  This assumes the router is just an
interface to some external TCP/IP network.  Otherwise, run the router
as the bridge and don't route IP for your class B for now.

	I think you should plan on future subnets as you grow, so you
might decide to use secondary interfaces from the start, even though
it doesn't seem worth it right now.  At least assign host addresses as
though they might be subnetted in future.

	--Kent

Thread Navigation

This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.

Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.

Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.

Back to All Threads