I am not quite clear what your question is and therefore not clear how much detail is appropriate in the answer. If you have a segment with subnet 10.1.0.0 255.255.0.0 and a segmnt with subnet 10.10.0.0 255.255.0.0 this config will route traffic between them ok.
Beyond that there are a couple of aspects of the config that I am not sure why they are there, such as :
no ip forward-protocol udp netbios-ns
no ip forward-protocol udp netbios-dgm
Also I am not sure why there is a default route. I am not sure why you have a dialer-list configured when you have no dialer interface configured.
Also configuration of ip directed-broadcast is a bit unusual, though I would not say that it was necessarily a problem. Is there some reason that it is configured this way?
We are a manufacturing company, and not sure if you have ever dealt with A/B or Rockwell Controls guys, but they seem to run things in a whole different world than us IT folks. And now as more and more control, I/O devices are getting slapped into the ethernet world, companies like mine are starting to see a change where their corporate environment is extending right down to the shop floor with equipment that is making our company run. (we have close to 150 nodes out on the floor now)
This is all fine and dandy, but there needs to be some protection of us against them and them against us. (I dont want to create sides, but with this you have to treat them as two completely different entities that just have a pipe between them that will allow certain connections and traffic to flow freely between both). I have had the whole corporate network taken down because of problems on the mfg side of things, engineers freely plugging things into the network and down it goes...long story.
So what my thoughts are, being a cisco/routing novice, and since i have access to this 2621 router for the next few weeks, is run some tests. Set up a scenario where this router acts as a middle man and can route between two independant LANs.
Thanks for the help. perhaps you can offer some further suggestions.
I certainly understand the need to separate parts of the network and to treat them as separate entities. I agree that putting a router between the segments is a good way to achieve this.
As I said in my previous post I believe that you have the basic concept of configuring each segment on an interface and routing between the segments. I am guessing that the router that you are experimenting on had been previously used for some other purpose and that you have put your two subnets into an existing config. I believe that there are several parts of that config which just confuse what you are trying to understand (and I pointed some of them out in my previous post). My suggestion is that you clear the config and start over again with a fresh start. Get to privilege mode; issue the command clear startup-config; issue the command reload and confirm the reload (if it prompts you about saving the existing config say no); when the router has booted you will have a fresh start for your experiment.
[toc:faq]The ProblemOn traditional switches whenever we have a trunk
interface we use the VLAN tag to demultiplex the VLANs. The switch needs
to determine which MAC Address table to look in for a forwarding
decision. To do this we require the switch to do...
[toc:faq]Introduction:Netdr is a tool available on a RSP720, Sup720 or
Sup32 that allows one to capture packets on the RP or SP inband. The
netdr command can be used to capture both Tx and Rx packets in the
software switching path. This is not a substitut...
IntroductionOSPF, being a link-state protocol, allows for every router
in the network to know of every link and OSPF speaker in the entire
network. From this picture each router independently runs the Shortest
Path First (SPF) algorithm to determine the b...