At 05:26 PM 7/15/2003 +0100, gab.seun jones.ewulomi wrote: >As suggested before creating another vlan would be more ideal.
Why would it be more ideal? >Yes agreed we know that floating statics are used when you have multiple >ways to the same destination in which you can load balnace or use as a backup. Floating statics can be used only for backup, not for load balancing. > In which if im correct in the case of load balancing you can load > balance traffic to the same destinating but using differnt paths or links If you want to have load balancing, then you better start looking into dynamic routing. Thanks, Zsombor >Thanks Zsombor > >regards, >seun > > >>From: Zsombor Papp >>To: "gab S.E jones" >>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: switch default gateway question [7:72288] >>Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 09:01:06 -0700 >> >>If you mean a L2 device when you say "switch", then those don't forward >>packets from the PCs based on default gateway. If this is news to you, >>then I am a bit worried about the outcome of this renumbering exercise... :) >> >>Anyway, I think you need to configure the secondary IP addresses only on >>the interfaces which face PCs (I would configure the *old* address as >>secondary). Every other interface can be readdressed in one step, one >>network segment at a time, along with the corresponding static routes >>(will be fun... have you thought about dynamic routing? :). I also don't >>think you need *floating* static routes, just an ordinary static route >>pointing to the new subnets (you need floating static routes when you >>have multiple ways to the same destination, not when you have two >>destinations at the end of the same way). When you set up all this, you >>can start moving the hosts (ie. PCs *and* the switches) to the new >>subnets, and that's about it. >> >>Thanks, >> >>Zsombor >> >>At 09:47 AM 7/15/2003 +0000, gab S.E jones wrote: >>>Basically I want to know how best to approach the situation. Our network is >>>all statically mapped no dynamic routing >>> >>>our switches(4506,3550,6509) are going to be changed to a different address >>>range. the switches can accept more than one default gateway. >>>The core routers addresses has to be changed to the same subnet as the >>>switches soon >>> >>>1)the switch old ip address is on a 11/8 address pointing to the core >>>router(interface) with a 11/8 address >>>2)now the switch addresses are being changed to a 10/16(subnetted) address >>>and the default gateway has to point to the core with a 10/16 address as >>>well >>> >>>Myu approach was to >>> >>>1)configure the swith with another default pointing to a 10/16 >>>2)configure a secondary interface on the core with a 10/16 address >>>3)the other core routers connected to this core will be also given a >>>secondary of 10/16 address >>>4)then on the core routers put floating statics for all our original routes >>>to point to the default GW 10/16 addresses >>> >>>I presume that because the swithes now have to defalt GW statements that the >>>swith will automatically send packest for pc's of 10 and 11 addresses. While >>>we slowly migrate all our lan devices to the new 10/16 GW >>> >>>5)will start gradually changing the lan devices to start pointing to the >>>10/16 GW >>> >>>Please correct me if im thinking of this the wrong way. >>> >>>Any advice will be greatly appreciated >>> >>>My apologies if I didnt explain myself properly >>> >>>regards, >>>seun >_________________________________________________________________ >Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends >http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=72325&t=72288 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
