Configuring swith to print from another switch (different subnet)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-07-2010 06:50 AM - edited 03-06-2019 10:59 AM
Hello all,
I'm new to Cisco and I need some help to configure the following scenario (probably too simple, but I have no experience sorry).
We inherited one Cisco 2960G (7 port), and one Cisco 3560G (24port).
Our configuration is as follows:
WAN router
|
ZyWALL USG200 Firewall (NAT) gateway 192.168.1.1
|
3560G — Dlink 24 port unmanaged
|
2960G
The people attached to the 2960G are in a different subnet 192.168.151.0, wth their own DHCP server, and their own internet connection
All the rest of the office are attached to the 3560G uplinked to the DLink, in the 192.168.1.0 subnet and using fixed IP addresses
The printers are in the 192.168.1.0 subnet
I can't move everything to the same subnet, as we have a special group of machines connected to the 2960G.
How can I allow the people from the 2960G to print?. They don'ta have to talk each other, only get access to the network printers. I use Cisco Network Assistant.
Thank you very much for your help,
Jud
- Labels:
-
LAN Switching
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-07-2010 11:59 AM
Hi,
you need a way to route between the different subnets. If you're not using different VLAN on the 2 switches you might be able to use the firewall.
On a cisco router this would be done with a secondary ip address, I'm not sure if Zywall offers a comparable feature. Although I'm not sure what you mean with "their own internet access". Is the 2960 connected to a different router or firewall?
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-08-2010 01:22 AM
Thanks a lot dirk !
Can I connect the two switches with a network cable?. I could put all the ports in the 2960G in a different VLAN, an configure the ports as trunks allowing the vlans, and then use a static route on each switch that points to the other lan?.
On the 2960G:
ip route 192.168.151.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 (ip of the 3560G switch)
On the 3560G:
ip route 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.151.71 (ip of of the 2960G switch)
Would this work?
But then would it be possible to allow access only to the IP of the printer 192.168.1.35 ?
Their own internet access means that the 2960G is connected to a different router to get internet access, they are two totally separated networks, but in the same office.
Thanks for your help,
Jud
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-08-2010 05:11 AM
JudAster2010 wrote:
Thanks a lot dirk !
Can I connect the two switches with a network cable?. I could put all the ports in the 2960G in a different VLAN, an configure the ports as trunks allowing the vlans, and then use a static route on each switch that points to the other lan?.
On the 2960G:ip route 192.168.151.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254 (ip of the 3560G switch)
On the 3560G:
ip route 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.151.71 (ip of of the 2960G switch)
Would this work?
But then would it be possible to allow access only to the IP of the printer 192.168.1.35 ?
Their own internet access means that the 2960G is connected to a different router to get internet access, they are two totally separated networks, but in the same office.
Thanks for your help,
Jud
Jud
It wouldn't work because the 2960G is a L2 switch ie. it is not capable of routing.
You could use the 3560G which is L3 to route between the 2 vlans and that would allow access to the printers but do you know which device currently is routing for the 192.168.1.0/24 network ? ie. the default-gateway on 192.168.1.x clients , what is it set to and which device is it ?
Also you say that the clients on the 2960 have their own internet connection so what is that device and is this the default-gateway for the clients on the 2960 ?
Jon
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-10-2010 04:56 AM
Thank you very much jon,
