Perhaps I have not understood something about your situation. But my experience of Windows is that if clients are given addresses in 184.108.40.206/24 then they need their default gateway to be in 220.127.116.11 and will not function correctly if the gateway is 18.104.22.168
If there is some aspect that I have not correctly understood then perhaps you can clarify for me?
Well, my isp gives me a few static IPs, so I have the route to them via an interface assigned a private IP - this is so I don't waste a routable IP for forwarding packets, when this procedure is taken care of by ARP. For example, here is the drawing
The problem is, that the interface e0/0 will only hand out IPs via DHCP for the subnet it is on. Even if i set the pool to 22.214.171.124-207, the addresses are not handed out.
Normally, a host with a routable address would use 172.16.16.1 as the gateway. The hosts do a broadcast ARP asking for the mac of 172.16.16.1 and forward frames to that MAC. No routable IP needed when the hosts can use a gateway on a different subnet (but same layer 2 broadcast domain as in this case). Linux hosts can do this no problem, with a few route commands. Proper route commands work in windows, but dont stick on the interface real long, even if the route is tagged persistent. I have found this only works when Windows gets its ip via DHCP, but the router's DHCP server wont hand it out, because its IP is different than the pool's subnet. Linux and Windows DHCP servers work fine for this Argh!
Therefore, do you know a way for the Cisco DHCP server to hand out IPs from a pool that lies on a different subnet than the interface is configured for? Thanks.
I guess my last resort is to do DHCP relaying, to a different DHCP server on different vlan/subnet.
I still find your situation confusing. From what I think I understand of your explanation I believe that a more appropriate solution would be for the router/DHCP to assign addresses from private address space, and for the router to use the addresses given from the ISP in a network address translation pool and to translate the private addresses from the inside interface into the pool addresses for the outside interface.
well, im sure its more inappropriate if people do not do this, and actually waste a routable address! If this goes on frequently, there could be hundreds of thousands of addresses wasted from ipv4. ARP does the job, so should route, at least not on windows. The route flaps, unless its given via dhcp!
We are pleased to announce availability of Beta software for 16.6.3.
16.6.3 will be the second rebuild on the 16.6 release train targeted
towards Catalyst 9500/9400/9300/3850/3650 switching platforms. We are
looking for early feedback from customers befor...
Introduction Featured Speakers Luis Espejel is the Telecommunications
Manager of IENova, an Oil & Gas company. Currently he works with Cisco
IOS® and Cisco IOS XE platforms, and NX to some extent. He has also
worked as a Senior Engineer with the Routing P...
In this session you can learn more about Layer 3 multicast and the best
practices to identify possible threats and take security measures. It
provides an overview of basic multicast, the best security practices for
use of this technology, and recommendati...