Proper network design?

I have a few questions for the group that maybe someone can answer. From my
studies when I got CCNA certified, I understood that different networks were
ALWAYS separated by a router. At my company we have this equipment that was
purchased several months ago that acts as a digital cellular network. It was
set up and was able to operate, but only in a limited way. Basically, this
is the setup - the digital cellular network was on the 192.168.2.0 subnet
(subnet mask 255.255.255.0). The company development LAN was on the
192.168.0.0 subnet (subnet mask 255.255.255.0). The two small networks (less
than 10 hosts in each subnet) were all tied together at a 24 port hub. The
gateway to the Internet was through a Linux box. The digital cellular
network was basically a box (with IP address 192.168.0.100) that passed
packets to network 192.168.2.0 through a low power transmitter to the
cellular hosts in the 192.168.2.0 subnet. With this setup, only one desktop
host on the 192.168.0.0 network could communicate to the 192.168.2.0
cellular network (desktop host 192.168.0.20). The problem of only one
desktop host in the 192.168.0.0 network being able to communicate with the
192.168.2.0 network was solved by replacing the Linux box with a Cisco 2514
router (with two ethernet interfaces). The configuration for the router was
exactly the same as the Linux box except for one small addition. The
following line was added as a static route:

ip route 192.168.2.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.100

Now let me ask you, have you ever seen a router that gets a packet on one
interface pass it right back out the SAME interface back to another host on
that same network? Our setup basically ties two DIFFERENT class C subnets
together through a hub and the Cisco router makes it all work perfectly.
This doesn't sound like standard network design as I've seen it described in
any text so far. I'll describe it a little more for clarity. If i'm on a
desktop PC (IP address 192.168.0.20) and ping IP address 192.168.2.2,
windows will send that packet to the default gateway (configured as
192.168.0.1 in windows network applet - which is the Cisco router) since it
lies in a different network (since the subnet mask is 255.255.255.0). The
Cisco router receives this packet destined for the 192.168.2.0 network and
since it matches it with the above static route, sends it back out the same
interface it came in on, back to another host (192.168.0.100 - the cellular
transmitter box) out to the cellular host (192.168.2.2). This is the way the
cellular network equipment manufacturer intended it to work. The setup
works, but it sounds really weird and nonstandard. Has anyone else
encountered such a setup or something similar before? Is this a kind of
network design that is done often? Doesn't a router normally always route
packets from one interface to another?

Thanks in advance for your responses.

Frank



Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=49536&t=49536
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to