I think the problem he’s referring to is the default gateway programmed in the 
radio.

From: Hass, Douglas A. 
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 1:12 PM
To: af@afmug.com 
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard




Whether you use /24, /29, or /30 on your interfaces, the routing should work 
the same way, though, right?  You shouldn’t have a stranded backhaul in a 
meshed network running OSPF/internal BGP.  If the link is actually hardware 
down or even has hardware up but non-functional, the routing table should still 
reflect the routes that are up (i.e. the ones where OSPF/BGP continues to 
communicate).

 

From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com] On Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:48 PM
To: af@afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard

 

I think youre doing what we are doing

I just defined a 172.31.0.0/24 for backhauls to be splitting up, maintaining a 
third octet was a mess. these router IPs are socondary IPs on the interface to 
the primary router/ospf communication

Going site one to site two uses 2 /30

Router 1 -172.31.0.1/30

backhaul 1 - 172.31.0.2/30 with gateway 172.31.0.1

backhaul 2 - 172.31.0.5/30 with a gateway of 172.31.0.6

router 2 - 172.31.0.6/30

 

This way the routes propogate through ospf, and you never get a stranded 
backhaul with a down link because you were gatewaying to the other side (SAF is 
forcing me to rethink this)

 

Its easy to manage with an excel spreadsheet

 

Trying to tie the side id to the subnet was impossible

 

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, TJ Trout <t...@voltbb.com> wrote:

Chinese

 

On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Tim Reichhart 
<timreichh...@hometowncable.net> wrote:

Mike
basically rob haas was helping me out on this he sent me an little cheat sheet 
like this:

 

a /29 – 255.255.255.248 is what I use on the backhauls

Each Site is assign a site number – say 33

Every site is assigned a /24 for management with my IP scheme of 10.100.site.X

The first backhauls would fall into 10.100.33.0/29 so:

10.100.33.1 – Local radio

10.100.33.2 – Local Router

10.100.33.3 – Remote Radio

10.100.33.4 – Remote Router

 

The next backhaul would be out of 10.100.33.8/29 so:

10.100.33.9 – Local Radio

10.100.33.10 – Local Router

10.100.33.11 – Remote Radio

10.100.33.12 – Remote Router

 

basically I want break down the ip's down for backhauls.

 

Tim


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  -----Original Message-----
  From: "Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net>
  To: af@afmug.com

  Date: 08/26/15 01:23 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard

  Can you tell us the bigger picture of what's going on so we can help better?



  -----
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
  http://www.ics-il.com
   

   


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

   From: "Tim Reichhart" <timreichh...@hometowncable.net>
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 12:09:01 PM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard


  I was told to take that /24 and break it down to /29. But I didn't see an way 
to make work without readdressing whole subnet.

  Tim

  -----Original Message-----
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard
  From: "Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net>
  To: af@afmug.com
  Date: 2015/08/26 18:59:54

  I did not, no.




  -----
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
  http://www.ics-il.com
   

  From: "Josh Luthman" <j...@imaginenetworksllc.com>
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 11:58:27 AM
  Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard


  Did you mean a /29 on eth1?
  Josh Luthman
  Office: 937-552-2340
  Direct: 937-552-2343
  1100 Wayne St
  Suite 1337
  Troy, OH 45373On Aug 26, 2015 12:53 PM, "Mike Hammett" <af...@ics-il.net> 
wrote:

  You can't have overlapping subnets.



  -----
  Mike Hammett
  Intelligent Computing Solutions
  http://www.ics-il.com
   

  From: "Tim Reichhart" <timreichh...@hometowncable.net>
  To: af@afmug.com
  Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2015 11:52:43 AM
  Subject: [AFMUG] Issues with doing /29 inside of routerboard

  Hi guys
  I am having bit of an issue getting /29 to work in routerboard. What I am 
looking to do is put 172.16.2.x/29 on ether2 but I already have 172.16.2.1/24on 
ether1. So I don't know what I am missing here.

   
   
   
   
   


   


   

 





 

-- 

If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as 
part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.



Douglas A. Hass
Associate
312.786.6502
d...@franczek.com

Franczek Radelet P.C.

300 South Wacker Drive
Suite 3400
Chicago, IL 60606
312.986.0300 - Main
312.986.9192 - Fax
www.franczek.com
www.wagehourinsights.com
Connect with me:
     
     

Circular 230 Disclosure: Under requirements imposed by the Internal Revenue 
Service, we inform you that, unless specifically stated otherwise, any federal 
tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not 
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purposes of (i) 
avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing 
or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter herein. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about Franczek Radelet P.C., please visit franczek.com. 
The information contained in this e-mail message or any attachment may be 
confidential and/or privileged, and is intended only for the use of the named 
recipient. If you are not the named recipient of this message, you are hereby 
notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message or 
any attachment thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this 
message in error, please contact the sender and delete all copies. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Franczek Radelet is committed to sustainability - please consider the 
environment before printing this email 

Reply via email to