Cisco Support Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Easy 2811 w /9-port HWIC Config Question...



I have 3 devices on subnet 0, and 3 devices on subnet 1, and  route traffic between them.

However, all the inter-subnet traffic  must go through an external TCP accelerator box

(that appears as a bridge, with 1 port in and 1 port out).

My current setup users 2 external switches (1 for each subnet), and the router interfaces

(FE0/0 plugs in to the subnet 0 switch, and FE0/1 plugs in to the subnet 1 switch).


There is a 9ESW HWIC installed in the 2811 router that I'd like to use,

and eliminate the external switches.

Unfortunately, I have no idea how to configure it to make this a reality.

Do I need to use VLANs to accomplish this?


Yes I'm quite new at this...

Cisco Employee

Re: Easy 2811 w /9-port HWIC Config Question...

Hi Grant.

Does your accelerator do trunking?

My thoughts would be something like this

                                                                carry vlan 1 and 2

pc---vlan1---[f1/1]2811[f1/2]----trunk----accelerator   <---bridge vlan 1 to vlan 3

                     |                         |            bridge vlan 2 to vlan 4


                                                      carry vlan 3 and 4

Now back on the 2811 have SVI in vlan 3 and vlan 4.  Vlan3 SVI will match up to the subnet of the PC's in vlan 1.  Vlan4 SVI matches up to subnet of PC's in vlan 2.

Point default gateway of vlan 1 PC to vlan3 SVI.

Hopefully you see what I'm doing here w/o me being too confusing.  Basically we are forcing the PC in vlan 1 to go through the accelerator to get to its default gateway.

Let me know if this is making sense.

New Member

Re: Easy 2811 w /9-port HWIC Config Question...

I'm still trying to wrap my brain around your suggestion, but the TCP accelerator does not trunk,

so I don't think it can be implemented. The idea of having additional VLANs

looks promising though. On the surface, this seems like such a simple

configuration, but the details are a real killer...

Thank you for your reply!