Actualy test it again, you will find that the cisco only routes a
host specific route or the entire network, try tracing to an ip
address in one of your subnets that is not directly listed in the
cisco table. It won't know what to do with it.
This is not actualy a limitation of cisco perse' it's one of RIP.
The netmask tables that livingstion implemented is a custom fix for
livingston routers only, Other routers use other protocols or static
routes to resolve the problem.
Jim McKenzie
mcs@isp.net
>After installing my eighth Portmaster, I decided it was time to implement
>netmask tables. Everything went as expected, except for the fact that I
>didn't need to add a static route on my Cisco gateway router. The Cisco's
>route tables showed a host route on a subnet boundary for each PM. And if
>I did a traceroute from the Cisco to a dialup user on a particular PM, the
>Cisco went straight to the correct PM, without having a static route to a
>"gateway" PM.
>Routing is on on all PMs, and I've verified proxy ARP isn't being used
>(the Cisco doesn't have ARP entries for any PM dialup users), and the
>Cisco doesn't have host routes for dialup users either.
>How is this working?
>--
>John W. Temples, III || Providing the first public access Internet
>Gulfnet Kuwait || site in the Arabian Gulf region