subnetmasks for gateways

Hello Hansang, it's been a while since I saw you post.

BernieM

Really? That's going to be a useful route

We kind of do, but it is somwhere else.

Also in the config would be something like

int fas 0/0 ip add 192.168.2.2 255.255.255.0

But in the case of the static itself the mask associated with the gateway is irrelevant - a next hop will normally be on a connected network.

P.

Sorry Dude, but he's right. The gateway is a device on the local network that devices use to get to non-local devices.

P.

Not quite. Think of "the street" as the router.

Your gateway is *your door* to get to the street.

Before you can get to your neigbour you need to get to the street. The street then know that bill lives at door no 3, Ben at 42, that rather nice Julie at 17 etc.

There is no point you knowing that Bill lives at three if you don't know where your door is.

Be careful here - it is rather shaky calling someone else when you are the one that is wrong. People are trying to help you sort a problem here, and calling them like that will not encourage them.

I'll try a diagram. That might help.

PC1 10.1.1.99/24 | _________________________________ lan 1 |10.1.1.1/24 R1 |10.2.2.1/24 _________________________________ lan 2 |10.2.2.2/24 R2 |10.3.3.2/24 _________________________________ lan 3 | PC3 10.3.3.99/24

PC1 will have a default route pointing at 10.1.1.1 - IN THE SAME SUBNET.

R1 will have three routes in the table 10.1.1.0 and 10.2.2.0 both connected. The third route may be the static route to 10.3.3.0, and the next hop would be

PC3 would have a default route - pointing at 10.3.3.2. R2 would be similar to R1. - 10.2.2.0 and 10.3.3.0, with 10.1.1 via 10.2.2.1.

If you take the defaulr route off PC1 and instead add a route to 10.3.3.0/24 via 10.2.2.2 it should not work. I deliberately say should rather than won't as there is always the possibility of a host misconfiguration and proxy arp helping out to make something work that should not.

P.

It does NOT reside on a different subnet.

Long time hearing from you. Hope everything's ok, Bae. Give my regards to Bayside.

-ja

The Dude wrote in alt.certification.cisco:

I'm blaming this on the fact that English is not my first language so we don't seem to understand each other...

Please! The poster I replied to, was the one that called me an idiot in the first place: ("you are sounding like an idiot"). I just used his own language. Do not copy and paste only my answer, but the whole thing. That's how everything started.

Now, with all my due respect for your CCIE, I found my answers on my own, and have considered this subject closed, (if you have followed this thread). I am just tired of it. People that are confused can go to cisco academy, where I referred them to.

The Dude

So, dude, when are you going to be man enough to admit that you've been wrong all this time?

I'm referring specifically to the fact that we don't have to tell a host the subnet mask of its gateway because the gateway is in the same subnet as the host, and any router being told of a next-hop address doesn't need to know the subnet mask of the next hop because it will be in the same subnet as one of the routers interfaces. Which ultimately is the simple answer to your question ...

BernieM

Thanks BernieM and John,

It sure has been a while! No issues, just been busy with "stuff" :)

Whatever! Just go to cisco academy where I refered to, and play the smart ass with cisco.

What part of " I am not dealing with this thread anymore" don't you get?

The Dude

Your reply seems to suggest you are dealing with the thread.