SVI routing on 2960x not routing to other gateway via static route

[m1tchsc0tt0]

I am having a hard time figuring out what I am missing here. But essentially I have a cisco 2960x switch with the SDM profile for routing enabled and IProuting enabled in the config. I have 2 Vlans (vlan 2 network computers are on 192.168.2.x 255.255.255.0) and vlan 10 (trunk link to router 192.168.1.x 255.255.255.0) Each vlan has a SVI 192.168.1.4 for vlan 10 and 192.168.2.1 for vlan 2. From the PC on vlan 2 I can reach both SVIs but cannot ping the other gateway / router on vlan 10 192.168.1.1. I have a static route set for the next hop gateway. if i do a ping 192.168.1.1 source vlan 2 from the switch it still can't ping the gateway 192.168.1.1 so I don't think its the PC. My config posted below. Also the other default gateway does show up in the arp table also posted below. I feel like I am missing something simple, any help appreciated thanks.

Protocol Address Age (min) Hardware Addr Type Interface
Internet 192.168.1.1 0 9cc9.eb3f.c71a ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.2 2 0008.320f.6e7d ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.4 - 00eb.d574.cc42 ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.5 19 d0c2.82dd.cc4f ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.36 30 4024.b2ff.0a53 ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.73 21 a434.d9ed.226d ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.83 2 8c49.6212.9e6a ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.100 35 3860.77d5.e29b ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.114 1 b8f0.0983.766c ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.166 23 020f.05b2.30a1 ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.1.196 1 2c3f.0bda.7ad2 ARPA Vlan10
Internet 192.168.2.1 - 00eb.d574.cc41 ARPA Vlan2

Current configuration : 2292 bytes
!
! Last configuration change at 20:45:50 UTC Sun Dec 10 2023
! NVRAM config last updated at 19:55:51 UTC Thu Dec 7 2023
!
version 15.2
no service pad
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
no service password-encryption
!
hostname
!
boot-start-marker
boot-end-marker
!
logging console emergencies

!
no aaa new-model
switch 1 provision ws-c2960x-24pd-l
ip routing
!
!
vtp mode transparent
!
!
!
!
!
cluster enable
!
!
!
spanning-tree mode pvst
spanning-tree extend system-id
!
!
!
!
vlan internal allocation policy ascending
!
vlan 2
name 192.168.2.0
!
vlan 10
name 192.168.1.0
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
interface FastEthernet0
no ip address
no ip route-cache
shutdown
!
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/1
switchport access vlan 2
switchport mode access
!
!
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/23
switchport trunk native vlan 10
switchport trunk allowed vlan 10
switchport mode trunk
!
!
interface Vlan1
no ip address
!
interface Vlan2
ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
!
interface Vlan10
ip address 192.168.1.4 255.255.255.0
!
ip http server
ip http secure-server
!
ip route profile
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.1
!
!
!
!
line con 0
line vty 0 4

login
line vty 5 15

!
end

[MHM Cisco World]

Ping from vlan 10 success since router have interface in that IP

Ping from vlan 2 no router dont know anything about vlan2 subnet 

You need to add  Ip route

<vlan2>

using IP of interface connect SW to router

MHM

[MHM Cisco World · Accepted solution]

To clear your confuse 

When I used unidirectional static route? When I use NAT

When I used two unidirectional static route? When I dont use NAT

Your SW not support NAT so you need two unidirectional static route 

MHM

[balaji.bandi]

As i stated number of times, if you not running any IGP protocol between router, there is no other means 192.168.1.1 aware of 192.168.2.0

what is stopping to adding route as suggested, rather we going circle here... what is the Device holding 192.168.1.1 (does this device have capabilities to add Route ? YES or NO.

If not bring the Routing mechanism to switch, change the IP from 192.168.1.4 to 192.168.1.1 (other device 192.168.1.1 to 192.168.1.4 with gateway 192.168.1.1) so VLAN can reach otehr device with new IP 192.168.1.4

[m1tchsc0tt0]

192.168.1.1 does not have capability to add route. This makes complete sense now! thank you all. Basically since the switch can't do NAT i would have to add a reverse route on 192.168.1.1 otherwise it won't ever work the way I am trying, Or as suggested I could switch the routing fully to the 2960 switch. 

[balaji.bandi]

We expecting user to know Switch is switch (until the latest switch model) - most of the switches does not support NAT and that is not intention of Switch designed.

For NAT you need Router to perform the task.

If the devie do not have routing capabilities take my other suggestion to move routing interface to Switch.