Illegally placing a router on the network

[dpounders]

I have some program users that are trying to sneak a router on my network. I need to know whether they can do this and it work without changing the core router.

I'm new at routers, so if my terminology is incorrect, I apologize in advance.

Senario:

Router 1 (core router) - Cat5000 w/RSM - Contains 3 subnets (130.196.140.254, 130.196.141.254, 130.196.142.254)

Catalyst 3500 switches for each subnet.

Router 2:

CISCO 3600 - interfaces configured with 192.168.40.254, 192.168.41.254, 130.196.142.253.

While Router 2 will be configured to router both 130 and 192 network, Router 1 will not be changed to route 192 network.

The workstation they are trying to reach from 192 network is a UNIX machine setup with multiple routes, and that workstation is on the 130.196.142 subnetwork. The multiple routes will be 'add route 130.196.142.254...' and 'add route 130.196.142.253...' Will it be able to reach the 192.168 network?

[doug.lockwood]

If I understand correctly, the only requirement is that the Unix host at 130.196.142.x reach the 192.0.0.0 networks. The hosts on 192.0.0.0 do not need to reach the 130.196.140.0 /24 and 130.196.141.0 /24. In this case, you do not need to change your router. This is especially true if neither of the routers are running a routing protocol, such as RIP.

For the Host, adding these two static routes to the appropriate startup file:

Route add net 192.168.40.0 -netmask 255.255.255.0 130.196.142 1

Route add net 192.168.41.0 -netmask 255.255.255.0 130.196.142 1

I would try to have some control of all routers attached to my network. However, including and empowering your user community will make it easier for everyone in the future.