Don't get into routing, they said.. It's rage-inducing, they said!

Well.. They were right..
Threw together a small subnet in CISCO Packet Tracer, working on building a small network, pretty much just for funs (and as a learning experience).

So, I've got a small network set up where the workstations can communicate with each other. Wonderful. Let's try and emulate an internet connection, shall we?
Big mistake.

Cut to a few days later and I regret everything - but I'm determined to figure out how it works.
I've tried way more things than I can list - or even remember.. Different IP's.. Static route settings, (blindly) attempting to use RIP - short of putting the 'ISP Router' on the same network.

Anybody mind taking a look at what I've got and pointing me in the right direction?

Hadn't seen this before, shall have to find a download for it and give it a go on a VM at some point, might refresh my memory a bit :)

Aha! I figured it outish...!
I needed to Bridge the routers.. Although I'm thinking putting a bridge in-between them is cheating.. Ought I to set something in the config? :confused:
Diving in at the deep end is often an odd experience when it comes to gaining new knowledge..

Moving to Networks forum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garacesh

Aha! I figured it outish...!
I needed to Bridge the routers.. Although I'm thinking putting a bridge in-between them is cheating.. Ought I to set something in the config? :confused:
Diving in at the deep end is often an odd experience when it comes to gaining new knowledge..

---

If you can put up a screenshot of the topology we may be able to help easier, could just be that the routers are not MDX/MDIX enabled so need a crossover, a problem solved by the bridge.

just had a look at your original upload, for info, assuming the router is yours you wouldn't use RIP,
set a default route on your router for anything it doesnt know and just shove it out of your interface to the internet :) either with:

ip default-network 12.16.218.35
or
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 fastEthernet 0/1

EDIT: and just looked at your vlans, VLAN1 should always be management vlan, so really you should use another for all your machines, or possible a separate vlan for desktops, servers and wireless devices to isolate potential issues. I can put together an example if you want? Or I can butt out :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by british_government

I can put together an example if you want? Or I can butt out :)

---

Oh, don't consider yourself a burden. By all means, go for it.
Pretty much going-in-blind with this, learning as I go along and make (many.. many..) mistakes. Building a network isn't exactly in my job description as an apprentice, but it's something I'd like to learn regardless.

I wasn't aware VLAN1, by standards, was management vlan - but I know zilch about inter-vlan-routing, so I think I'll leave sorting that one out until I've got this 'internet connection' sorted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SYNACK

If you can put up a screenshot of the topology we may be able to help easier, could just be that the routers are not MDX/MDIX enabled so need a crossover, a problem solved by the bridge.

---

Sure. See the uploaded pics. Granted, there's only 3 workstations on the map, but I've accounted for the port usage in the switches and ensured DHCP has a large enough pool (and then some, for future expansion).. Anything else y'might need, just go for it.
Also, I don't even know if I've done 'the internet' right.. So I might even have b0rk'd that up.

(Also, yes, it says Port 23: Modem instead of Router. My bad.)

a bridge is a router.

Quote:

---

Wonderful. Let's try and emulate an internet connection, shall we

---

what do you exactly mean by this?

you have a switch connected to one side of the router for the internal network correct? and somethign on the outside being th internet?

and vlan1 can be used just fine.

to actualy connect the router to the internet your going to need to either have a public IP for each client PC or be running NAT.

Rob

Well - Like I said - Going in blind here, that's why I'm using Packet Tracer and not any of the spare switches we have lay around :p. The 'internet' cluster is basically just another network with an outward-facing router. Nowhere specific, it could be Google, Edugeek or Andromeda Research Corporation. Just another network that isn't part of mine. (Or at least, that's the plan!)

Attachment 15570

See attached, I have just put that together quickly using a few different vlans. There are many benefites of a system like this, for example security as you can apply different access lists to different vlans for different permissions.

As a basic example only machines on the ADMIN vlan can telnet to the switch, in practise you would have this as ssl and probably only 1 or 2 machines, but the idea is the same.

What you could try is assigning an access list so wireless devices can only ping the server vlan, but no others?

And another note, the only downside to vlanning really is that inter-vlan traffic goes through your router rather than just the switch, as it is changing networks so must be routed. The router is running a simple rip setup.

Have you got routing tables on the client devices that specify the router to use to find the other network?

Rob

your diagram also shows a 12.11.x.x network connected to a 12.16.x.x does that fall in the same subnet?

Rob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by british_government

Attachment 15570

See attached, I have just put that together quickly using a few different vlans. There are many benefites of a system like this, for example security as you can apply different access lists to different vlans for different permissions.

---

Can't. Incompatible. What version are you using?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by twin--turbo

Have you got routing tables on the client devices that specify the router to use to find the other network?
your diagram also shows a 12.11.x.x network connected to a 12.16.x.x does that fall in the same subnet?

---

No and no D:
I have default gateway set, but since nothing connects to the router without hitting a switch first, the switch sends the traffic forward. Plus, now with that bridge there (for now..) a client on the network can ping the router inside the cluster (seemingly) without a problem, so I wasn't sure if I needed a routing table..
The 12.11.x.x and 12.16.x.x aren't meant to be on the same network - they're just representing external IP addresses, 12.11 being someone else's network somewhere - anywhere - it doesn't really matter too much. It's really the only way I could think of representing an internet link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Garacesh

Can't. Incompatible. What version are you using?

---

5.3.2, let me know if you cant get hold of it, I think I have a copy I can upload.