RV042 Static Routing Question

I am currently using RV042 in the two-WAN backup mode. However, I tried the redundant option and am finding it to give me more bandwidth and better performance than only one of the WANs.
My problem is that in the redundant mode, I am unable to use a few websites that I use on a regular basis. One of the sites is our internet hosted time sheet service and their site just goes crazy when I try to access it through the router set up in redundant mode. I am not even able to login to their site, and it is important for my daily work.
My question is - can I set up static routes for certain sites so that the router knows to access them through only one of my WANs? For example, if my timesheet software site is 123.123.123.123, and my prefered WAN gateway is 68.68.68.68, can I tell the router to only access this site through the given gateway, even if the router is configured to use either WAN?
I have tried static routes and it does not seem to work at all.
For example:
Site: 123.123.123.123
SM: 255.255.255.0
Gateway 68.68.68.68
When I save this and run the tracert to 123.123.123.123, it goes through the other gateway, and not the one I specified here.
Any hints are appreciated.
Thanks,
Alex P.

If your using this in load balance mode, go to system management and scroll down to protocol binding. Chances are your going to a secure site with both wans working and the site sees one connection with two ip addresses coming at it and breaks the connection. You can do a protocol bind for all your https traffic to go out one wan for all the ip addresses in your network and this should fix the issue. You can do this for mail and other protocols that would get messed up by the dual wan. Hope this helps.

Similar Messages

Help with RV042 Static Routing

I just purchased an RV042 Dual WAN Router. Both WAN's are connected from different ISP's. I have a PBX phone server connected to this router and want all traffic to and from this phone server going out strictly on one WAN and all the computers and the rest of the traffic on the other WAN. If I understand correctly, this needs to be set up in static routes? If that's the case, how would I do that? If not, the question still stands. Please help.

Hello Vitaly,
What you are looking for is Protocol Binding. By setting this up you will be able to control what traffic goes out which WAN port. Protocol Binding can be done for certain traffic types or for certain IP addressess.

SA 500 Series Static Route Question

Can you enter a static route to go out a specific interface rather than an IP?
Example:
172.16.1.1 ---> WAN1
172.16.100.1 ---> WAN2
Can this be accomplished?

See that's where it gets a little fuzzy.
The 172.16.x.x address's exist on modems on the WAN side.
The actual WAN (or gateway in this case) IPs on the modems are dynamic so I really don't want to specify a fixed IP for the "gateway".
Really, if it just went out WAN1 or WAN2 the appropriate modem would pick it up.
How would I accomplish this?
Would I give it Quad Z's or something like that?

In A Perfect World - Using Static Routes In RRAS 2012 To Traverse Sites

I have site-to-site VPN tunnels between my main sites
NYC <--> UK
NYC <----> SANFRAN
NYC <----> BOSTON
NYC <----> MALTA
UK <----> SANFRAN
UK <----> BOSTON
And could see ALL sites when I had my DA/RRAS server using one of the existing subnets (for example, when I used US VPN on NYC DHCP (192.168.2.x) I was able to see EVERYTHING on any site we had a site-to-site VPN with (i.e. from VPN client I could access
MALTA, UK, SANFRAN, BOSTON).
Alas I had to change that to a different subnet (192.168.145.x) and now only see the 192.168.2.x network in NYC.
Is there a way to add static routes on the NYC & UK DA/RRAS servers so this access is restored? Or would this be solved at the Layer 2/3 network level?
Michael P. O'Hara

No, you need to allow forwarding of broadcast packet, but it's really against the best-practice, as you can kill easilly your satellite link.
I agree with you for wins, as I personnaly does not use it and try to remove it when I see someone use it, but it's the only solution for what you want (network discovery over LAN). (even LLTD is not routable beyond router)
Editted: You need to see all machines, but does the enduser must see them ?
Regards, Philippe
Don't forget to mark as answer or vote as
helpful to help identify good information. ( linkedin endorsement never hurt too :o) )
Answer an interesting question ? Create a
wiki article about it!

Persistent Static Routes

I have three Macs that need to have persistent static routes set up. I installed RouteSplit for this purpose and it seems to work well. After reboot, I can ping a host machine on the static route. But if I try to mount an SMB share over that route, it fails and I find that I can't even ping the host address anymore. If I reboot, I am back to having connectivity again, but attempting to mount the SMB share breaks it again. Is there something in the SMB.conf file that is breaking my static route?
By the way, even after it has been broken, I can do a netstat -rn and it shows the static route in the routing table. I am lost.
Bob Reed

I can ping a host machine on the static route
By name, or by address?
But if I try to mount an SMB share over that route, it fails and I find that I can't even ping the host address anymore
By name, or by address?
You don't state how you're testing your ping, either before or after the attempt to mount the server.
There is a 100% disconnect between SMB and your routing table - it shouldn't be possible for SMB to affect that, nor should SMB care how to get to the specified host. Therefore I'm thinking the problem lies somewhere in between, possibly in the name resolution part of the process, hence my questions.

Two quick VLAN routing questions

lets say I have a L3 switch routing 4 VLANs
VLAN 1 is 192.168.10.0/24, the switch's virtual interface is 192.168.10.254 inside this vlan
VLAN 2 is 192.168.20.0/24, the switch's virtual interface is 192.168.20.254 inside this vlan
VLAN 3 is 192.168.30.0/24, the switch's virtual interface is 192.168.30.254 inside this vlan
VLAN 4 is 192.168.40.0/24, the switch's virtual interface is 192.168.40.254 inside this vlan
there is only one router going out from this switch to the net, and lets say it is in VLAN 1 and it's address is 192.168.10.1
first question-- inside of the L3 switch I will need to add a default route of 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.10.1
so that all traffic not corresponding to a 192.168.x.x address knows where to get out to the net, correct?
secondly- when configuring that router, is there a difference if I use the following static route:
192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.254
instead of
192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.20.254
either way, the packet gets to the L3 switch, but in one case it gets there via the VLAN interface inside of VLAN 1, and in the other case, it gets there via the VLAN interface inside of the VLAN for which the traffic is destined anyway. what im trying to figure out is, will this make any difference at all? especially in terms of broadcast packets?
if it makes no difference, then is it safe to say that the following static route would be optimal?
192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 192.168.10.254
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Re "firstly". Correct. The L3 switch will route traffic according to its routing table. By default it knows all IP subnets to which it is directly connected to, i.e. all the VLAN subnets. If you have to add a default route manually or not depends on the exact implementation. It may well be that the L3 switch will use the any default gateway for routing which you use for the IP settings of the switch itself (if there is an option in the web interface to set a default gateway). If you cannot define a default gateway on the L3 switch you probably have to add a static route manually. The easiest way should be to check the current routing table and see if there is a default gateway or not.
Re "secondly". A router can only forward packets to the next hop router. The next hop router must be connected to that router. The route "192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.10.254" is correct for a router with IP address 192.168.10.1 and subnet mask 255.255.255.0 as 192.168.10.254 is connected to the router. "192.168.20.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.20.254" is not correct. The router cannot learn the path to a specific subnet 192.168.20.0/255.255.255.0 by using a gateway in that subnet. It is not correct to use that kind of a route and you should not use it even if it might even work (because the router does a plain ARP request to find the MAC address of 192.168.20.254 and your L3 switch will respond to the ARP request even if it is on the internet of 192.168.10.254). The very moment when there would be another router between the 10 and 20 subnets it would not work anymore...
Re your conclusion: I would recommend to keep four static routes for the existing subnets on the L3 switch instead of putting everything into a larger single subnet which includes a lot of addresses which are not connected there. Technically it works if you only use working IP addresses. But you will see some loops if you send something to 192.168.55.50 or similar. The gateway router will send it to the L3 switch which will send it back to the gateway. They should figure it's a loop but still I would not recommend this kind of setup... Add routes for each of the L3 switch subnet...

SGE2000/P Static Routing (equals L2+) Explain?

What does L2+ mean? I realize these aren't L3 switches with SVI capabilities, so what is the purpose of configuring static routes if there is no InterVLAN routing capability?
T.I.A.,
Chris

Welcome to Cisco Community!
With out getting into a huge discussion I will try to answer as quickly and directly as possible.
Our SFE and SGE series switches are Layer 3 switches (can also be configured as L2) so they are able to perform as a (inter VLAN) router or gateway for all VLANs. Once you have created the VLANs and assigned each an IP address, that IP address will become the GW for that VLAN. Under Routing you will not see any learned networks until you assign the VLAN to a port and the port becomes active. You will then need to configure a default route to send the traffic out to the cloud. The router will need to belong to the same VLAN as the switch. So if the switch has an IP address of 172.16.30.1/24, the router will have an IP of 172.16.30.254/24 for example. The route would read like this: 0.0.0.0/0 next hop 172.16.30.254 metric 2 (or higher).
As for static routes as a L2 or L3 switch, they would be useful when you have a device attached to another switch which is disjoined from your typical network on the local switch. In other words, lets say you have 3 (aside from default native VLAN 1) VLANs V10 - 30. All you of your devices belong to these VLANs but you have a server on VLAN 30 which is not connected to this switch. You will then create a static route for that server's IP address to the remote switch.
VLAN30: 172.16.30.1 (local SGE)
Server: 172.16.30.200 (on remote switch)
Remote Switch: 192.168.20.1 (remote SGE)
VLAN30: 172.16.30.2 (on remote SGE)
Static Route:
destination 172.16.30.200 next hop 172.16.30.2 metric 2
I hope this answers your question. These are really my favorite switches, as I find them very reliable and highly configurable. I love these things.

Is Static Routing Necessary?

I'd like to use an 1812 to route data between 2 subnets (say 10.1.1.x and 11.1.1.x). I'm setting up the two WAN interfaces (FastEthernet0 and FastEthernet1) with IP addresses and subnet masks for each of the two subnets.
Will traffic heading from the 10.1.1.x subnet and destined for the 11.1.1.x subnet automatically route correctly (and vice-versa), or will I need to configure static routing?
Also, a follow-up question. If I'm only expecting traffic from one of the subnets and destined to the other (either 10.1.1.x to 11.1.1.x, or vice-versa), do I need to configure a default route? If no default route is configured, what happens if a packet comes in destined for an unknown subnet?

Trevor
In the situation which you describe where the router has 2 interfaces and networks are configured on each interface, then you do not need static routing to route between those networks.
In this situation I do not see any reason to configure a default route. The default route is certainly not needed to route between those networks. And if a packet came into the router and the destination were on some network not connected to the router, what could you do? Do you have any way to forward packets to any other network? As you describe it there is no benefit for a default route. And in this situation if a packet did come in with a destination for an unknown subnet, then the only thing that the router can do is to drop the packet.
HTH
Rick

What is the Right Form of OSX 10.8 's Static Route Grammars

I am not good at mac os code. so i have some questions about route grammar.
eg:
I need add a static route for a IP,
just like:sudo route -nv add -net 10.0.0.0 192.168.42.254
i input it in termina,then it worked. But when i restart mac. the route did not exist.
so where is not right form about the "sudo route -nv add -net 10.0.0.0 192.168.42.254"?
who can tell me more about How to add STATIC ROUTE in mac os? waiting on line.guys help me.

Defining a persistent static route on Mac OS X - Server Fault
Adding static routes to a network - Mac OS X Hints
RouteSplit
Setting a static route every boot with launchd - Ask Different

RV042 - WAN Routing Assistance

I have my RV042 set up in Dual WAN mode and both WANs are working properly. I would like to configure WAN1 to handle all traffic, unless it fails and then have everything to go to WAN2. Pretty much what Smart Link Backup does, however with that enabled only 1 of the WANs is live at any given time. I'd like both WANs to always be live as I'm going to see the second one as a back-door into the network. Is this possible to do with routing? I tried setting a routing rule to have everything to go WAN1, but when WAN1 goes down, nothing is rounted via WAN2.
Thanks.

Hello,
I understand what you were trying to accomplish but this is not something you can do through static routing.
Your route technically says to get to the 192.168.1.0 subnet go to 192.168.1.1, and since the subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 your destination is being changed to the network ID.
There is however a way to setup Dual WAN so that certain clients use a certain WAN.
Go ahead and delete the static route you have created as it won't do what you are looking for.
Then go to System Management >> Dual WAN and click the configuration for one of the WANs.
At the bottom of that page you will see the protocol binding section.
For the service you should select all traffic, the source IP will be whatever clients you want to send out a certain WAN, and for the destination just use 0.0.0.0. Then select the WAN port you want that client to use. This will setup a rule to send traffic from that host out the WAN you specified. You may need to create several to cover all of your clients.
There is also a Small Business Knowledge base article with some screenshots to help illustrate what I am talking about. That is available here about halfway down the page.
Setup Dual WAN on RV042
Hope that helps, if you do have any problems with it go ahead and give us a call at the SBSC and we can assist you in getting this configured.
Thank you for choosing Cisco,
Christopher Ebert - Advanced Network Support Engineer
Cisco Small Business Support Center
*please rate helpful posts*

Redistributing Floating Static route

Hi All,
I have a question.when we redistribute a static route with AD as 210 into MP-iBGP to carry the route to other PE's ,will it also carry the AD value for this route ?
Help would be really appreciated.
Thanks
Regards
Anantha Subramanian Natarajan

Hello Anantha,
AD is locally significant and is never propagated to another node by any protocol including BGP.
the other PE will see a route in VRF of type iBGP so it will see something like
B [200/0]
the BGP AS path will have an origin ? meaning the prefix is the result of a redistribution on originator PE and not by the usage of network command.
Hope to help
Giuseppe

Static routes, ISDN & different remote IP addresses

Scenario:
My client has 4 sites situated around an ISP MPLS cloud. All 4 CE routers connect to ISP PE equipment via different access circuits (See attached diagram).
The central site has Cisco 2800 router with 10M LES circuit into MPLS cloud (FastEthernet i/f) and ISDN BRI i/f for incoming calls from 3 remote sites.
The 3 remote sites are Cisco 1800 routers all with ISDN dial-out i/fs and 1 site has numbered X21 serial link into MPLS cloud, whilst other 2 sites have IP unnumbered DSL circuits.
Problem:
1. Routing on the 4 routers is by static routes only, as ISP does not permit routing protocol.
2. Central router does not know if the remote DSL & X21 circuits have gone down, as they are all access circuits into MPLS cloud.
3. Central router (2800) needs floating static routes to change so that packets route via ISDN when remote sites dial in, but these are proving problematic to configure, as both the ISDN and FastEther i/fs show as up on the 2800 under normal operation. So the routes stay as the higher weighted route all the time, regardless of whether the remote has dialled in or not.
The remote routers (3) can dial in fine when their Serial or ATM interfaces go down (using backup command on i/fs). I have tried using floating static routes on the central router using 10.1.0.0/29 addresses assigned to the 4 ISDN interfaces, but the floating static remains up all the time, as the interface on the central router stays up all the time (as expected). The ISDN static route therefore stays in the routing table all the time, even when there is no ISDN call into the central site. The config on the central router is as follows:
interface BRI0/1/0
ip address 10.1.0.1 255.255.255.248
encapsulation ppp
isdn switch-type basic-net3
ppp authentication chap
ip route 172.16.2.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.0.2
ip route 172.16.2.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1 200
ip route 172.16.3.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.0.3
ip route 172.16.3.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1 200
ip route 172.16.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.0.4
ip route 172.16.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1 200
The only way I think I can get around this problem in a simple manner is to have floating static routes with higher weights assigned to completely different IP addresses than the local ISDN interface. In the past I have seen that async modems dialing into a PRI circuit appear as directly connected in the routing table of an AS5300 (and work), even though they may be different network addresses than the PRI Dialer i/f address. An example of the static routes on the central router would be as follows:
ip route 172.16.2.0 255.255.255.0 2.2.2.2 (Route to site 1 only when ISDN backup is invoked)
ip route 172.16.2.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1 200 (Route to site 1 under normal conditions, i.e when remote has NOT dialled central via ISDN)
ip route 172.16.3.0 255.255.255.0 3.3.3.3 (Route to site 2 only when ISDN backup is invoked)
ip route 172.16.3.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1 200 (Route to site 2 under normal conditions, i.e when remote has NOT dialled central via ISDN)
ip route 172.16.4.0 255.255.255.0 4.4.4.4 (Route to site 3 only when ISDN backup is invoked)
ip route 172.16.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1 200 (Route to site 3 under normal conditions, i.e when remote has NOT dialled central via ISDN)
Questions:
1. Has anyone experienced this type of problem across multiple access circuits?
2. Has anyone tried to implement different IP addresses at the remote ends of an ISDN network? (See diagram below) I want to try /32 addresses on the 4 routers, e.g 1.1.1.1, 2.2.2.2, 3.3.3.3 and 4.4.4.4. (Dont have time to lab test this solution)
3. Can anyone suggest a simple solution?

What you want is object tracking, which will resolve this problem.
This technology sets up an object that pings a remote address. You use a route map to force the ping out of the interface that appears to remain up, in this case the MPLS main interface.
When a link fails somewhere, the object no longer gets a response and transitions to the down state.
You can use a static route that tracks the object to become active, this will be used to activate your local ISDN.
This was described in Packet Magazine 2ndQ 2004, here:
http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac114/downloads/packet/packet/apr04/pdfs/apr04.pdf
Read the article about Static and Policy Routing Enhancements, its excellent and should help you out.
Another way would be to build a GRE based VPN over the existing MPLS network, have you considerd that?
Andy

Lync 2010 Mediation Server Static Route

Has anyone used this method for allowing NON enterprise voice users the ability to utilize the conference call back feature?
http://www.confusedamused.com/notebook/lync-dial-in-conferencing-static-route-configuration/
If so, can you answer these questions? We have deployed this successfully but with a few hiccups.
When a non enterprise voice user uses the conference call back feature, the lync dial plans are ignored but the number is sent with a +1 in front of it. Is there a way for the CUCM to strip off that +1 and add a 9 to it? Whats the best way to accomplish this?
When the conference does call them back, the caller ID displays their Lync number. We would rather it display a different number. Is this possible? How could we accomplish this on the CUCM?
Thanks!

You can modify the trunk configuration using Lync Server 2013 Control Panel which were created using Lync Server 2010 Control Panel.
You can set different Pool Trunks, defining the different features for each trunk.
Lisa Zheng
TechNet Community Support

IPv6 internet routing question. To NAT or to Route

Hello!
I've gotten 2 /56 block of IPv6 addresses from our ISP. We're in the process of rolling out a new website and along with that I'm pushing that we create our IPv6 presence at the same time.
My Question is in regards to Routing vs NAT-ing... in my "Internet" environment, the space between my ISP routers and my firewalls, I have configured one of my 256 /64 networks 2001:XXXX:YY:100::1/64. That would mean My firewall could be 2001:XXXX:YY:100::B/64. My web servers sit in a DMZ off my firewall.
Should I:
A. Provision a random IPv6 subnet in the DMZ and use the firewall to NAT to an IP in the 2001:XXXX:YY:100::/64 range. I thought one of the points of IPv6 was to do away with NAT.
B. Provision 2001:XXXX:YY:101::/64 network in DMZ and ROUTE to the DMZ server. I am thinking this is the solution, but what Protocol to use? Im guessing I advertise my /56 via BGP to ISP, and use what? OSPFv3 between internet routers and firewalls? Use Static Routes? Is there anything that's considered 'best practice' for this type of situation?
To Route or to NAT?

Hi,
if I understand correctly you have /64 on the external interface of your firewall facing your isp.
you should not use stateless auto config SLAAC on your Dmz. Setup your servers statically.
also there is not nat in ipv6, just ensure your stateful firewall handles ipv6 ok, taking special care for icmpv6.
That means you should use a /64 from your /56 for your Dmz. No nat.
whether you setup a static route towards your firewall to reach your Dmz from outside the firewall depends on your network design.
Whether you use bgp with your isp depends on what you agreed with your isp. Has your isp setup a static route of your /56 on their router to you, or are they expecting you to use bgp ?
hope this helps
mark

Router can perform static route load balance

Dear All
I am not sure a question. I need your idea and help. The question is if the router can perform static route load balance. I tested it. The result showed No. If you have any experience on it, could share it with me. I also post my result here. Thank you

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
Normally they can, but you generally need different next hops. How did you "test".

RV042 Static Routing Question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for