Adding a route question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Roland Hall said:
You don't want to point the DFG on 192.168.1.0 network to 192.168.1.1 to get
to the 192.168.2.0 network. The systems on the 192.168.1.0 network will
default to the edge router (FW) and the router (FW) will tell them how to
Click to expand...

I never Default them to the FW,...always the LAN Router (middle router in
this case), which then Defaults to the FW because I never want the LAN to
depend on the FW to be "up" in order for the LAN to function. I want the LAN
to stand on it's own apart from the Internet or any devices used for the
Internet. I realize that it can be made to work either way, but this a
personal "standard" I always follow.
 
Hi All,

I will like to thank everyone for their help, and I will try your
suggestions today, and let you know how it turns out.

Regards,
Sam
 
Hi All,

Thank you for all your help I added the static route to the firewall and I
am good to go.

Muchas gracias,
Sam
 
Phillip Windell said:
I forgot to add that the NAT Device will require a Static Route for the LAN
Segment that is on the opposite side of the LAN Router from where it sits.
This is the only Static Route in the entire thing that I can think of.
Click to expand...

That is in the position that I call a "middle router".

It is between the edge (LAN) router and the ISP
router.
I don't think the LAN Router (middle router)
Click to expand...

That is what I refer to as an "edge" router. It
has no downstream (further from the Internet)
routers.
would have any static routes
because everything is "directly" connected as far as it is concerned,...i
would only have the Default Gateway.
Click to expand...

So you are correct in your positioning of the
manual route, just that is not the way that I was
referring to them (re: middle, edge)
 
: : > You don't want to point the DFG on 192.168.1.0 network to 192.168.1.1 to
: get
: > to the 192.168.2.0 network. The systems on the 192.168.1.0 network will
: > default to the edge router (FW) and the router (FW) will tell them how
to
:
: I never Default them to the FW,...always the LAN Router (middle router in
: this case), which then Defaults to the FW because I never want the LAN to
: depend on the FW to be "up" in order for the LAN to function. I want the
LAN
: to stand on it's own apart from the Internet or any devices used for the
: Internet. I realize that it can be made to work either way, but this a
: personal "standard" I always follow.

The FW is a router. I have no idea why you would do it different. And if
the middle router goes down, now the 1.0 network cannot even surf the net,
which will also pull down mail if the mail server is on the 1.0 network.

--
Roland Hall
/* This information is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
without any warranty; without even the implied warranty of merchantability
or fitness for a particular purpose. */
Online Support for IT Professionals -
http://support.microsoft.com/servicedesks/technet/default.asp?fr=0&sd=tech
How-to: Windows 2000 DNS:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;308201
FAQ W2K/2K3 DNS:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;291382
 
Roland Hall said:
The FW is a router.
Click to expand...

I refuse to give NAT/FWs the honor of calling them "routers". Our $3000.00
FW (from Watchgaurd) is not even capable of functioning as a router. We use
an HP5304XL as the LAN router,..everything uses it as the DFG, and it in
turn uses the FW as it DFG. If the FW goes down I just simply change the
DFG on the 5300XL to point to another "way out" and everything keeps working
and nothing else needs reconfigured.
I have no idea why you would do it different. And if
the middle router goes down, now the 1.0 network cannot even surf the net,
which will also pull down mail if the mail server is on the 1.0 network.
Click to expand...

And if the FW goes down half the LAN is out of business and the Internet
because the FW is doing both jobs of the Internet and re-routing traffic to
the middle router destined to the other segment . I just don't want to see
LANs dependent in anyway on the Internet or the devices related to the
Internet in order to exist,...with the one exception being VPN links and
related hardware.
 
Herb Martin said:
So you are correct in your positioning of the
manual route, just that is not the way that I was
referring to them (re: middle, edge)
Click to expand...

No problem.
 
Back
Top