Your following concepts aren't that difficult. They are also NOT the
concepts that the thread is concerning.
> Say we have pm.my.net with IP on ethernet port of 10.0.0.2
> We have a crisco router as 10.0.0.1 and it has a T1 to the net
> On the PM we set:
> a network route for 10.0.0.0/24 to ether0
> a default route to 10.0.0.1
> a second network route for 10.0.1.0/24 to ether0
1) You don't set static routes to an interface on PMs. You set static
routes to an IP address gateway. Thus items 1 and 3 won't work.
> It's just some simple static routes...not rocket science. I don't
> understand why we have to wait for OSPF for this work work.
It isn't simple static routes.
The issue is the non-standard practice of putting a second IP network on
the same physical network segment. ALL IP routers and hosts only
recognize ONE IP network on a network segment.
Here comes the cry "WAIT!!! Cisco does...". Forget it.
Even a Cisco you have to TELL the Cisco that there is a second IP network
on the segment. If you don't tell the Cisco the other IP network is
there via the secondary IP address in the interface definition, it
IGNORES THE IP TRAFFIC, just like PMs do.
Secondary addressing is nice in some cases. I've been tempted to use in
previous jobs.
Secondary addressing can also turn into a routing nightmare due to the
routing concepts of split horizon and poison reverse. If you don't know
what those terms mean, go look them up, study what they mean, how they
apply in secondary addressing situations and THEN decide if you want to
do secondary addressing.
JGT
-- John G. Thompson Livingston Enterprises Inc. Phone: (800) 458-9966 JOAT(MON) 6920-220 Koll Center Pkwy. Fax: (510) 426-8951 support@livingston.com Pleasanton, CA 94566 http://www.livingston.com