static route question

[spivy66]

question.

I have a machine ip 192.168.1.23 and the default gateway is pointing to my cisco 2600 at ip 192.168.1.1

The cisco 2600 ip last resort is 192.168.1.20 so as you all know all traffic will be sent to 192.168.1.20. My question is i need 192.168.1.23 to send all its traffic to 192.168.1.22 instead of 192.168.1.20. So i created a static route on the cisco ip route 192.168.1.23 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.22

for some reason the traffic still goes to 192.168.1.20.. I though static routes have a higher priority then default gateways..

Also i know i can just change the gateway on 192.168.1.23 but i want to do this through the router not on the local machine.

-thanks

 

[spivy66]

Ok, two things assuming I don't care about if there stack-able( budget reasons). Are there other cisco's switches
I can use?

My other question is, and correct if i'm wrong ,but if all I'm using is 3 sub nets can't i use say just one cisco 3650 and setup intervlan routing between all three masks on just that router and create a vtp and have all my other switches layer 2. Everything should go through vlan trunks? or do i need all layer 3 switches for this?

Thanks guys!

 

[unclerico]

One layer three switch will work. The reason I mentioned the 3750s is they will offer you at least a little bit in terms of redundancy in your collapsed core.

I hate all Uppercase... I don't want my groups to seem angry at me all the time! =)
- ColdFlame (vbscript forum)

 

[burtsbees]

If your network is small, then you can get a switch (depending on how many total users you have) and do router on a stick, creating subinterfaces on the LAN interface, each with a vlan ip address, and the router will route between vlans. The switch is set up with the switchports as access ports for whatever vlans you designate for each switchport, and optionally one SVI for management, and a gateway (necessary). If you have more users than will fit on a 24 port switch (remember one for trunking=23 users in 3 vlans) then I would definitely get a layer 3 switch. The 3560 is a bit cheaper and will route its own vlans (layer 3).

Router on a stick creates

1.Bottleneck---not bad for a small amount of users
2.Single point of failure, but then again so does one layer three switch...

/

tim@tim-laptop ~ $ sudo apt-get install windows
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
E: Couldn't find package windows...Thank Goodness!

 

[spivy66]

Ok all makes sense guys. One last questions and once again thank you for all your professional input.

If I do go with 1 layer 3 switch and the rest layer two for inter vlan routing can i also setup port channeling or will that create a nw loop because I will already have vlan trunks?

Does it even make sense to use port channeling in this type of scenario.

 

[unclerico]

yes, i would use etherchannel between the access layer switches and your core switch.

I hate all Uppercase... I don't want my groups to seem angry at me all the time! =)
- ColdFlame (vbscript forum)

 

[spivy66]

so the traffic for the vlan trunks aren't the actual data packets, in stead they go thought the uplink port or in my case the etherchannel?