Newbie Simple routing question 2

[pvwdr]

I know this has got to be simple, I just have never done it before. I have two networks 10.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 and 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0 and I need them to communicate via this Cisco 800 router. Below is my config (10.0.0.1 is my gateway to the internet on my firewall). From 10.0.3.171 I can ping 10.1.0.50 (Ethernet0 on router) but I can't get to anything else on the 10.1.0.0 network. From 10.1.3.50 I can ping 10.0.0.5 (ethernet1 on router) but nothing else on the 10.0.0.0 network. Nat is not enabled, at least I don't think it is. I am a bit confused. If anyone could help me find the way to freedom, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thank you,
Bill Rieger

#show ip route
Gateway of last resort is 10.0.0.1 to network 0.0.0.0

10.0.0.0/16 is subnetted, 2 subnets
C 10.0.0.0 is directly connected, Ethernet1
C 10.1.0.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0
S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.0.0.1

#show running-config
interface Ethernet0
ip address 10.1.0.50 255.255.0.0
no cdp enable
hold-queue 32 in
hold-queue 100 out
!
interface Ethernet1
ip address 10.0.0.5 255.255.0.0
no cdp enable
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1
ip route 10.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 Ethernet1 permanent
ip route 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0 Ethernet0 permanent
ip http server
!

 

[ChicagoJim]

First, since the two networks are directly connected to the router interfaces I believe you can get rid of the route maps in the configuration.

no ip route 10.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 Ethernet1 permanent
no ip route 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0 Ethernet0 permanent

Second, be sure that the clients in the 10.0.0.0 network have 10.0.0.5 as their default gateway, and that the clients in the 10.1.0.0 network are using 10.1.0.50 as the gateway.

I've never tried a setup where the firewall sits in the same network subnet as some of the hosts, but I think it should work unless the router refuses to send packets back out the same interface it received them on. Maybe someone else knows the answer to that.

 

[pvwdr]

ok, thanks, I tried it but that did not work, same results as posted above

 

[tschouten]

Could you post your whole config?

 

[IPKONFIG]

Ok, here you go.

PCs on network 10.1.0.0 subnet should have a gateway of 10.1.0.50 (which is the router)

PCs on network 10.0.0.0 network should have a gateway of 10.0.0.5 (which is the router)

Your router should have a static route set up with a wildcard 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 to 10.0.0.1 which is your firewall.

Make those changes and your network will function correctly.

"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

 

[pvwdr]

Here is my whole config:
Using 923 out of 131072 bytes
!
version 12.2
no service pad
service timestamps debug uptime
service timestamps log uptime
service password-encryption
!
hostname x
!
enable secret 5 x
enable password 7 x
!
username x password 7 x
ip subnet-zero
!
ip audit notify log
ip audit po max-events 100
!
!
!
!
interface Ethernet0
ip address 10.1.0.50 255.255.0.0
no cdp enable
hold-queue 32 in
hold-queue 100 out
!
interface Ethernet1
ip address 10.0.0.5 255.255.0.0
no cdp enable
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.0.0.1
ip route 10.0.0.0 255.255.0.0 Ethernet1 permanent
ip route 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0 Ethernet0 permanent
ip http server
!
!
!
line con 0
exec-timeout 120 0
no modem enable
stopbits 1
line aux 0
stopbits 1
line vty 0 4
exec-timeout 120 0
password 7 132F51360F01077C7E6508
login local
length 0
!
scheduler max-task-time 5000
end

 

[tschouten]

I see you are not running a routing protocol. Which is fine, but you need to enable at least IP ROUTING. Log on to the router, go to enable, then configure terminal, then use the command ip routing.

This will enable the router to actually route packets without having a routing protocol running. Hope that helps you out a bit.

 

[pvwdr]

Thanks for the tip, I had already enabled ip routing though. Should I enable a routing protocol? How would I go about doing this, is there documentation somewhere that would guide me through it?

 

[IPKONFIG]

PVWDR,

Have you check your PCs and made the router change like I suggested?

Save yourself some time.....take the advice.

"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

 

[IPKONFIG]

Also....why would you enable a routing protocol? On one router? You'll just be wasting process power if you turn it on.

All cisco routers know about all directly connected interfaces. And can route to all directly connected interfaces. If you turn on a routing protocol, your "show ip route" will still show what you currently have. Which is two directly connected interfaces. This is a simple issue that can be solved in just a few minutes worth of time.

"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

 

[pvwdr]

The default gateway of my test pc is 10.0.0.5 and I can ping 10.1.0.50 from that pc, I don't think it is a gateway issue

 

[tschouten]

No they don't IPKONFIG, you can prove this by using RIP. If the router knew everything on its interface why would you then have to supply it with a network to use or an ip route. If you are using ip routing you have to tell the router where to place packets. The gateway of last resort is used to tell the router, when in doubt send packets here, an ip route from 10.1.1.100 to 172.1.1.12 will allow traffic to flow in that direction, but not back from that direction. You would need a route (if the addresses are on the same machine then do this on the same machine) you would need one route in the opposite direction. Without this the router will not know where to place the packets. Back to example of rip, say you enacble RIP on two routers (without supplyng the dynamic network configuration) you HAVE to supply routes for the routers to talk to each other even though they share a neighborship already. It isn't any different for interfaces on the same machine, it knows it exists, even knows the address, but it does not know how to use it (yet). The router is stupid, until you teach it to be smart.

 

[IPKONFIG]

Pvwdr -

PC with address in 10.0.0.0 subnet has gateway of 10.0.0.5

10.1.0.50 is interface on router for subnet 10.1.0.0

PC in 10.0.0.0 subnet cannot ping a PC or host in 10.1.0.0 subnet. PER YOUR POST: From 10.0.3.171 I can ping 10.1.0.50 (Ethernet0 on router) but I can't get to anything else on the 10.1.0.0 network.

Problems of this nature indicate that PCs in the 10.1.0.0 subnet have the wrong gateway. What happens is when your pings reach a host in subnet 10.1.0.0 and try to respond to your ICMP requests, they have to be sent to the gateway for that subnet to be routed to a different subnet. Which means they have to go to the ethernet address on the 800 series of 10.1.0.50 If they don't get there, your pings will time out.

Of course this would assume that your not running any type of firewall software on your PCs

If you've done the steps that I listed in my 1st post, and done them all, and still don't work. Then I apologize for all my other posts. Apparently I'm out of my league here.

"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

 

[tschouten]

>>>>>Ok, here you go.

PCs on network 10.1.0.0 subnet should have a gateway of 10.1.0.50 (which is the router)

PCs on network 10.0.0.0 network should have a gateway of 10.0.0.5 (which is the router)

Your router should have a static route set up with a wildcard 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 to 10.0.0.1 which is your firewall.

Make those changes and your network will function correctly.
"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear


AGREESS COMPLETELY WITH THIS!!

I forgot to mention IPKONFIG, what I was thinking/talking about is different address blocks. He has the same block of addresses, so you are right. If he has ip routing enabled the router should route to the correct paths, howeve, if he different blocks as I showed in my example he would have to use a route statement. But what you posted earlier is what I agree with.

 

[tschouten]

PLEASE ALL NOTE the SECTION IN THE ABOVE POST WAS FROM IPKONFIG I ONLY WROTE FROM AGREES WITH AND BELOW, GOING TO MARK HIS POST HELPFUL.

 

[IPKONFIG]

Thank you Tschouten. I had to draw this out on paper to make sure I was right. I thought I was losing my mind there for a minute. Appreciate the backing.

"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

 

[tschouten]

Welcome, when I'm wrong I admint to it. Lord knows I can be WRONG, oooohhh so wrong from time to time. But what you posted is Excellent information. Soemtimes I get caught up with what the router is doing and stop thinking about what the pc may need instead.

 

[IPKONFIG]

Now there is only one thing that's eating at me....if Pvwdr does check all these settings and makes some changes....does it work?

Please....I have to know!

"I can picture a world without war. A world without hate. A world without fear. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it."
- Jack Handey, Deep Thoughts

 

[tschouten]

Now you know why before any service provider /vendor can achieve platinum statice they have to have a minimum of three CCIE's. When you get there you may know a whole lot but you are always going to miss some small something. (Note I am not a CCIE...I only wish, working hard on it htough).

 

[pvwdr]

the suspense is over ... I was able to ping 10.1.3.150 from 10.0.3.171, the default gateway was not set on the 10.1.3.150 pc. Thank you both for your assistance ...the only problem I have now is that, with the gateway correct, I can not get out to the internet from 10.1.3.150