> On Tue, 22 Oct 1996 patrick@value.net wrote:
>
> > > Framed-Address = xxx.yyy.zzz.65,
> > > Framed-Route = "xxx.yyy.zzz.64 xxx.yyy.zzz.65 1",
> > > Framed-Netmask = 255.255.255.224
> > >
> > > But I was unable to reach any host on that subnet from the PM itself,
> > > and when doing a traceroute to a host, the PM directed packets towards
> > > its gateway, so it didn't even know what to do with them.
> >
> > Did you put the netmask in the netmask tables for all of your
> > routers(applicable if you are using RIP)?
>
> Yes, the PM had the proper netmask table entry, and my gateway Cisco
> had a static route for the /24 pointing at the PM. All the /27s out of
> that /24 were connected to that same PM, so I didn't bother updating
> the netmask table on other PMs. In the above case, .65 was reachable,
> and the Cisco directed packets for .66 towards the PM as expected, but
> the PM threw them right back at the Cisco.
You should have static routes in the Cisco for the /27's pointing to the
PM, not trying to do it as a /24.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Patrick Greenwell (510) 943-5769 voice
Systems Administrator (510) 210-2000 modem
Value Net, Inc. (510) 943-1708 fax
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/