RE: Simple route/gateway forwarding
James Smallacombe <[email protected]> Mon, 5 Apr 2010 16:31:20 -0400 (EDT)
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.operators.internet-access |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Spot on. On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Brian Johnson wrote: > OK... is this a correct diagram? > > > +-----------+ +------------+ > | 2811 RTR |-PAT----->| CPE-RTR A | > +-----------+ +------------+ > | 192.168.7.1/21 > | > /---\ +-----------+ > | LAN |-------------| CPE-RTR B |--PAT--> > \---/ +-----------+ > | 192.168.7.10/21 > | > | 192.168.7.x/21 > +--------+ > | CLIENT | > +--------+ > > > - Brian > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:list-bounces@inet- >> access.net] On Behalf Of James Smallacombe >> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 2:00 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: RE: Simple route/gateway forwarding >> >> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Brian Johnson wrote: >> >>> What you are trying to do is definitely possible. How you are > stating >>> this makes my head hurt. :) >> >> Sorry...I can see how it looks super-complex, but in reality, it's not >> too >> bad. >> >>> You have a LAN using the 192.168.7.0/24 network. This network has > two >> >> Actually, it's using 192.168.0.0/21. Nothing in there is actually >> subnetted out, although, for example, 192.168.7.x is set aside for >> network >> equipment and 192.168.3.x is set aside for workstations, etc. >> >>> externally facing routers and one internally facing router. The >>> internally facing router uses NAP (do you mean PAT, overloaded NAT?) >> and >> >> Yes, like most NAT implementations like this, it is overloaded, not >> 1-to-1. >> >>> uses the 192.168.0.0/21 network internally. >>> >>> +------------+ +------------+ >>> | Provider A | | Provider B | >>> +------------+ +------------+ >>> | | >>> +-----------+ +-----------+ >>> | CPE-RTR A | | CPE-RTR B | >>> +-----------+ +-----------+ >>> 192.168.7.1/24 \ / 192.168.7.10/24 >>> \ / >> >> In the case of provider A, there is no customer access to their CPE >> router >> and it is not doing NAT. NAT is being performed by the customer's >> 2811. >> RFC 1918 to the internal Ether and provider A's "real" /26 on the >> external >> Ether. Provider B's Netgear is on the same LAN as the 2811's internal >> Ether and performing NAT to B's upstream network. We DO have access > to >> this B's Netgear. I gave it 192.168.7.10/21 while the 2811 bas >> 192.168.7.1/21. >> >>> +------------+ >>> | LAN SWITCH | >>> +------------+ >>> | >>> | 192.168.7.2/24 >>> +----------+ / ip route 0.0.0.0 >> 0.0.0.0 >>> 192.168.7.1 >> >> This is a little off. 192.168.7.1/21 is on the 2811's internal Etherm >> while a real IP is on the external interface. The Cisco has >> >> ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 real.ip.of.A's.CPE.router >> >>> | 2811 RTR | NAT/PAT <--< ip route 192.168.3.240 >>> 255.255.255.255 192.168.7.10 >>> +----------+ \ >> >> That looks correct, above. >> >>> | 192.168.0.1/21 >> >> You mean the 192.168.0.0/21 network above, right? >> >>> If this diagram is correct, and the CPE routers are configured >>> correctly, then packets bound for 192.168.3.240 WILL be forwarded to >>> 192.168.7.10. What that router does with it is another question all >>> together. >>> >>> Do you have access to the CPE routers? Are you using a routing >> protocol >>> or just static routes? You are dealing with all private IP addresses >> in >>> your example. Are they really all private IP addresses or are there >> some >>> public addresses in here? >> >> Just static routes. Want to avoid RIP and the Netgear doesn't do > OSPF. >> >>> - Brian >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:list-bounces@inet- >>>> access.net] On Behalf Of James Smallacombe >>>> Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:33 AM >>>> To: Inet-Access Mailing List >>>> Subject: Simple route/gateway forwarding >>>> >>>> >>>> This is really basic, but since I've never tried it before (and > it's >>>> not >>>> working), I want to see if it's possible, one way or another: >>>> >>>> customer has a network hooked up to provider A using provider's CPE >>>> router. They also have a 2811 doing NAT, which is the default >> gateway >>>> for >>>> the NAT'd network 192.168.0.0/21. The 2811 then has a default > route >>> to >>>> the CPE router and a typical "internal" Ethernet on 192.168.7.1 and >> an >>>> "external" Ethernet on Provider A's static IPs. >>>> >>>> To this, they add a second connection, a business broadband >> connection >>>> using a typical broadband router (NetGear, I believe) to provider > B. >>>> They know their provider A static IPs, won't route through provider >>> B's >>>> network, but certainly the NATed 192.168. network will. I stick > the >>>> Netgear on the same Ether as the 2811's internal interface and give >> it >>>> 192.168.7.10. All workstations use a default gateway of >> 192.168.7.1. >>>> The >>>> idea is to be able to switch them over to 192.168.7.10 without >> having >>>> to >>>> change their settings, by just re-routing some networks on the > Cisco >>> to >>>> provider B. I tried this as a test: >>>> >>>> ip route 192.168.3.240 255.255.255.255 192.168.7.10 >>>> >>>> Similar to a ppp /32 route. However, all traffic from > 192.168.3.240 >>>> still >>>> goes out the default route to provider A via the default route. Is >>>> there >>>> a way to make this work without subnetting 192.168.3.0 and putting >>>> aliases >>>> of it on one or both routers? >>>> >>>> James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor >>>> [email protected] >>> http://3.am >>>> >>> >> > ======================================================================= >>>> == >>>> -- >>>> Eat sushi frequently. - Avi >>>> [email protected] is the human contact address. >>>> [email protected] is the list posting address. >>>> See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options: >>>> http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list >>> >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email message, including any >> attachments, is for the sole use of the >>> intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged >> information. Any unauthorized review, >>> copying, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are >> not the intended recipient, please >>> contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the >> original message. Thank you. >>> -- >>> Eat sushi frequently. - Avi >>> [email protected] is the human contact address. >>> [email protected] is the list posting address. >>> See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options: >>> http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list >>> >> >> James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor >> [email protected] > http://3.am >> > ======================================================================= >> == >> -- >> Eat sushi frequently. - Avi >> [email protected] is the human contact address. >> [email protected] is the list posting address. >> See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options: >> http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list > -- > Eat sushi frequently. - Avi > [email protected] is the human contact address. > [email protected] is the list posting address. > See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options: > http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list > James Smallacombe PlantageNet, Inc. CEO and Janitor [email protected] http://3.am ========================================================================= -- Eat sushi frequently. - Avi [email protected] is the human contact address. [email protected] is the list posting address. See below URL for subscribe/unsubscribe and list options: http://inet-access.net/mailman/listinfo/list