Just a quick question as to using a "router-on-a-stick" design. The book I am using to re-certify for my CCNA says that a router on a stick is a bad idea because of its single point of failure and that routing on the "backplane" with a L3 switch is a much better option.
While I agree with this, it is also a lot more expensive to do it this way. But on to my question:
Are router on a stick used in many production environments? I know a lot about this question depends on how may users are on the network, what kind of data they are doing (i.e. data or voice AND data), how much time they are staying on the local subnet, etc...
It seems to me, that the router on a stick method would be much cheaper than to have to buy and put a L3 Switch into the distribution layer when I could have a 2800 router or better performing distribution and core work for me.
Some routers (2811 with the appropriate Network Module) allow you to create Etherchannel Bundles on the routed/switch interfaces. So If I have one 48 port switch with three or 4 vlans on that ONE switch, I can use a router on a stick and then do an etherchannel from the switch back to my 2811. Wouldn't this not only give me the ability to route between the Vlans but also aggregate ports for higher speeds AND give redundancy incase of link failures??
After you enable routing, you would create your VLANs that you want to support, and then you would create interfaces for those VLANs. You then would assign your 192.168.x.x addresses to those VLANs, and these addresses become the gateways on the workstation. (In other words, your gateway would be the VLANs address and not the routers).