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 <[email protected]> wrote: > Chinese > > On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Tim Reichhart < > [email protected]> 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" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> 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" <[email protected]> >> *To:* [email protected] >> *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" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> Date: 2015/08/26 18:59:54 >> >> I did not, no. >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> From: "Josh Luthman" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> 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" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> You can't have overlapping subnets. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Mike Hammett >> Intelligent Computing Solutions >> http://www.ics-il.com >> >> >> From: "Tim Reichhart" <[email protected]> >> To: [email protected] >> 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.
