Date: Wed, 4 Sep 1996 08:24:46 -0500 From: "Daniel M. Eischen" <deischen@iworks.InterWorks.org> To: heagre@epoch.com.au Cc: questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Any network gurus out there? Message-ID: <9609041324.AA12780@iworks.InterWorks.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >I believe the problem is that my companys router has a netmask of > >0xffffff00 and no routes to networks A and B through the FreeBSD > >router. Without getting in to company politics (and how long it > >takes to get anything done!), I don't really want to attempt getting > >my companys network administrators to change the configuration of > >their router. > > You are quite correct. The netmask of 255.255.255.0 on the 'company' router > will mean that that router will expect to be able to talk 'directly' with > all ip addresses in X.Y.109.0-255. > > The solution is for your company to alter the routers config to a > 255.255.255.192 netmask and the put a static route in the company router like > 'route add X.Y.109.0 255.255.255.0 X.Y.109.62' > > This effectively says that for the address space that is not X.Y.109.0-63 > direct all packets at X.Y.109.62 as it 'knows' how to handle the rest. > > Note that it must be the static X.Y.109.0 route that must be inserted into > the company's dynamic routing protocol by the company router. The connected > route of X.Y.109.0 netmask 255.255.255.192. insertion will confuse early > distance/vector protocols like RIP, and Cisco's IGRP. Yeah, I was thinking that I would have to add three static routes to the company router with a netmask of 255.255.255.192. The three static routes would be to X.Y.109.64/128/192. I didn't know that I could do it with one route as you've shown above :). Thanks, Dan Eischen deischen@iworks.InterWorks.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9609041324.AA12780>