Cisco newbie with a routing problem with Cisco 2621

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by Rick Bruner, Oct 25, 2006.

  1. Rick Bruner

    Rick Bruner Guest

    We recently changed providers, which has caused all sorts of headaches
    for me. The new ISP does not provide routers, but the sales rep found
    us a Cisco 2621 and someone to program it. Seeing as how I have had
    to have the programming corrected a couple of times already, I suspect
    my routing problem might stem from the Cisco.

    We have 4 concurrent Class C addresses, and all but one of the Class
    C's are working fine. The last one,, will not allow
    access to certain (not all) websites or ftp servers. I have
    eliminated the DNS and DHCP on my end as the culprit (I believe), so
    I'm stuck with thinking the Cisco may be the problem.

    I'm at a complete loss here, as I'm not a Cisco person, and really
    need some direction. Does any of this make sense? I have posted my
    config below, if it is any help.

    Thanks for any help anyone can offer me!!


    The current config is below:

    Using 1104 out of 29688 bytes
    version 12.3
    service timestamps debug uptime
    service timestamps log uptime
    no service password-encryption
    hostname INET
    enable password xxxxxxxxxx
    memory-size iomem 20
    no aaa new-model
    ip subnet-zero
    ip cef
    ip name-server xx.x.xx.xx
    ip name-server xx.x.xx.xx
    interface FastEthernet0/0
    description connected to xxxxxxxx
    ip address
    no ip proxy-arp
    duplex auto
    speed auto
    arp timeout 30
    interface FastEthernet0/1
    description connected to DHCP
    ip address secondary
    ip address secondary
    ip address secondary
    ip address
    duplex auto
    speed auto
    ip classless
    ip route FastEthernet0/0
    ip route FastEthernet0/0
    ip route FastEthernet0/0
    ip route FastEthernet0/0
    ip http server
    snmp-server community xxxxxxxx RO
    line con 0
    line aux 0
    line vty 0 4
    password xxxxxxxxx
    Rick Bruner, Oct 25, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ouch, direct ethernet route ;-). You should use

    ip route x.x.x.x

    instead, where "x.x.x.x" is the IP address of the other end of our
    FastEthernet0/0 link (your default gateway). If your config works, your
    ISP seems to have proxy-arp enabled but this is not a good solution in
    my opinion. I avoid such setups strictly.
    Ouch again, much more direct ethernet routes ;-). You should remove this
    part because:

    a) "FastEthernet0/0" seems to be the wrong direction, because your /24s
    resides behind "FastEthernet0/1" ?

    b) those extra route configurations are superfluous because your cisco
    knows the networks already due to the "interface" configuration before

    I don't know if this will solve your ftp/webserver problem at all, but
    it may be a beginning.
    Gerald Krause, Oct 25, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Rick Bruner

    Rick Bruner Guest


    Thanks for the response. I don't think it helped my routing issue at
    all (I'm still testing), but boy howdy did it affect our network
    speed!! Everyone had been complaining about the speed of this new
    10mb pipe, but as soon as I made the changes you recommended, network
    speed went off the chart! I may still have problems with that fourth
    Class C, but right now no one is noticing. Thanks for making my life
    at least somewhat better!

    By the way, with our old ISP, I was able to use a subnet mask of (the range was xx.xx.124 - xx.xx.127), but it appears I
    am unable to use the same with these new addresses. They are
    contiguous, but whenever I check a subnet calculator , it tries to
    include Is that possibly where my routing problem is

    I hadn't planned on becoming Cisco certified, but it looks like I may
    not have a choice.

    Rick Bruner, Oct 26, 2006
  4. Nice to hear :).
    Your four /24s aren't contiguous in this way: x.x.204.x - x.x.x.207.x
    can be combined to one network with an netmask of but not
    x.x.205.x - x.x.x.208.x
    So you can't and shouldn't use them as one plain ethernet network and
    your DHCP server should be aware of this. He have to serve different
    networks and unique def-gateways for each network.

    How are your clients configured, especially the ones from the 208
    network (netmask and def-gw)?
    Gerald Krause, Oct 26, 2006
  5. Your four /24s aren't contiguous in this way: x.x.204.x - x.x.x.207.x
    Ok, that's correct.
    This won't work properly unless you configure some ugly hacks too. Avoid
    such things where you can ;-).

    If you have still problems accessing the internet from your 208 network you
    should do some tests, e.g. trace*) the targeted IP address in the internet
    from one of the problematic IP addresses and from an other working IP
    address and compare the results.

    *) try it with and without name resolving
    Gerald Krause, Oct 26, 2006
  6. Rick Bruner

    Rick Bruner Guest

    It's to the point where I believe the problem lies with a particular
    computer as opposed to the router, as I can ping and trace the
    majority of that network from the other network...all but that one
    computer. NOW I will get to start tearing that one apart to find out
    what the user has done. :^)

    Gerald, you have been a tremendous help to me. Thanks again for your
    support on this!

    Rick Bruner, Oct 27, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.