I'll open a TAC case to have other names supported...
Larry Letterman Network Engineer San Jose Transport Cisco Systems Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 4:58 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: Subnet question [7:60711] > > > Larry Letterman wrote: > > > > thats pris's job here....if she writes enough detailed > > answers we dont have to buy her books...:) > > Oh no! > > By the way, the only nicknames that are supported are Cilla, PO, (and Cil, > if you are Chuck.) Nicknames that map to "sissified" have been deprecated. > The preferred name is my canonical name, Priscilla. :-) > > > > > Larry Letterman > > Network Engineer > > San Jose Transport > > Cisco Systems Inc. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > > Behalf Of > > > Tamhankar, Nitin > > > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 11:18 AM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Subnet question [7:60711] > > > > > > > > > Thank you very much for taking pains to right such a detailed > > explanation. > > > Thank you all for your answers they were very helpful. > > > > > > Thanks > > > Nitin > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 12:36 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Subnet question [7:60711] > > > > > > > > > You may not need virtual LANs. Real LANs solve the problem. > > :-) This is a > > > classic case of subnetting. > > > > > > With DHCP, the client should get the right address when it > > > broadcasts after > > > it moves, so there's no issue. > > > > > > Leaving DHCP out of the picture, the need to ensure that a > > moved > > > node can't > > > communicate is met simply by the way IP works. > > > > > > Assume there's a client with this config: > > > > > > address = 100.10.1.100 > > > subnet mask = 255.255.255.0 > > > default gateway = 100.10.1.1 > > > > > > Assume the client is physically sitting on the 100.10.2.0/24 > > network. When > > > it wants to send to nodes on the 100.10.1.0 network, it will > > compare its > > > address with the destination address, assume it's on the same > > subnet, and > > > send an ARP broadcast. The ARP broadcast won't reach the > > > destination though, > > > which is on a different LAN, so it won't work. > > > > > > (Make sure the router isn't configured for Proxy ARP. But > > even with Proxy > > > ARP, communication won't work. With Proxy ARP, the router > > could respond on > > > behalf of the destination on the 100.10.1.0 network. However > > that host > > > wouldn't be able to respond because it would assume that > > 100.10.1.1 is > > > local.) > > > > > > Assume the client wishes to reach devices on the 100.10.2.0 > > or 100.10.3.0 > > > network. It will compare its address with the destination > > address > > > and decide > > > that it's not on the same subnet, so it needs to send to the > > default > > > gateway. It will send a broadcast for the default gateway, > > which > > > won't work > > > because 10.10.1.1 is on a different LAN. Once again make sure > > Proxy ARP is > > > disabled. I'll leave it to the reader to figure out what > > would happen in > > > this case if Proxy ARP were enabled. :-) > > > > > > The question of VLANs versus real LANs requires more info. > > How many router > > > ports to you have? Is each router port a subnet? Or do you > > plan to have > > > multiple subnets out one router port, in which case you need > > VLANs and > > > inter-VLAN routing on the router. > > > > > > _______________________________ > > > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > > www.troubleshootingnetworks.com > > > www.priscilla.com > > > > > > Nathan Nakao wrote: > > > > > > > > I'd probably use VLAN's. > > > > > > > > Conf t > > > > Int vlan 101 > > > > Int vlan 102 > > > > Int vlan 103 > > > > > > > > Then setup the DHCP to assign IP addresses accordingly. > > > > > > > > Once that is done. Set the vlans to 101 for first floor, 102 > > > > for second > > > > floor, and 103 for third floor. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > On > > > > Behalf Of > > > > Tamhankar, Nitin > > > > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 8:40 AM > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Subject: Subnet question [7:60711] > > > > > > > > > > > > This might be a very elementary question for some of you > > guys > > > > but I > > > > would appreciate the answer. > > > > > > > > If an office which has 3 different floors and has Cisco > > routers > > > > and > > > > catalyst switches and windows environment. We need to > > configure > > > > it in > > > > such a way that each floor is on its own subnet for example > > > > > > > > floor1 100.10.1.0 > > > > floor2 100.10.2.0 > > > > floor3 100.10.3.0 > > > > > > > > Also if a computer which has IP address in subnet > > 100.10.1.0 is > > > > moved > > > > from floor 1 to floor 2, it should not communicate with the > > > > network > > > > unless its IP address is changed to one in 100.10.2.0 > > subnet. > > > > > > > > How it can be accomplished? > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > Nitin > > > > > > > > [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type > > > > application/ms-tnef] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=60781&t=60711 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
