">As suggested before creating another vlan would be more ideal. Why would it be more ideal?"
Because it is cleaner. With the proposed solution you would be dealing with secondary addresses, traffic for both 10/16 and 11/8 floating around on the same VLAN, etc. Besides, it sounds like the network is "flat" now, with an 11/8 subnet (if you can call that a subnet). They are moving to a 10/16 address space, that is subnetted. I'd assume a logical breakout like 10.0.2.0/23 10.0.4.0/23 10.0.6.0/23 etc, based on geographic location (separate subnet per IDF or floor). It would be pretty hard to do that all on one VLAN... So you are going to be moving 2000 PC's that are all in one VLAN to a bunch of separate VLANs. This is assuming a lot, but it's not like we were sent a Visio diagram of the existing and planned network... Fred Reimer - CCNA Eclipsys Corporation, 200 Ashford Center North, Atlanta, GA 30338 Phone: 404-847-5177 Cell: 770-490-3071 Pager: 888-260-2050 NOTICE; This email contains confidential or proprietary information which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the named recipient(s). If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected the email, please notify the author by replying to this message. If you are not the named recipient, you are not authorized to use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email, and should immediately delete it from your computer. -----Original Message----- From: Zsombor Papp [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2003 12:55 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: switch default gateway question [7:72288] 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=72341&t=72288 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
