cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
1066
Views
0
Helpful
17
Replies

Routing between two 3750s issue

cmeljakovo
Level 1
Level 1

Hi Eveyybody,

I have two 3750s interconnected via L3 port channel (second switch will be placed on WAN after finished additional config).

I have RIP enabled for subnets on both sides, everything seems to be working perfectly fine, routing is OK...etc.

The problem I have been experiencing is:

1. Let's say VLAN1 is 10.0.0.1/24 (on switch_1) and VLAN1 L3 interface is not present on switch_2.

I can get from hosts on both sides to each other, that is not an issue, but when TRYING TO get to any clients on VLAN 1 (only, work when vlan 2...etc.) from switch_2 (itself), IT ALWYAS times out!?!

I am attaching configuration files from both switches for your review, plus routing tables. Please let me know if you need more info.

Any help with this issue will be highly appreciated!

Best regards,

Ed

SWITCH_1#sho ip rout

Gateway of last resort is 10.0.0.254 to network 0.0.0.0

C 10.1.0.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan151

10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 13 subnets, 2 masks

C 10.192.200.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan200

C 10.10.10.0/30 is directly connected, Port-channel10

C 10.192.100.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan150

C 10.192.101.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan149

C 10.192.10.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan110

C 10.192.2.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan102

C 10.192.3.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan100

C 10.192.1.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan101

R 10.196.2.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.1, 00:00:21, Port-channel10

R 10.196.3.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.1, 00:00:21, Port-channel10

C 10.192.4.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan601

R 10.196.1.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.1, 00:00:21, Port-channel10

C 10.192.20.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan120

C 10.0.0.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan1

C 192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan900

S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.0.0.254

--------------------------------------

SWITCH_2#sho ip rout

Gateway of last resort is 10.10.10.2 to network 0.0.0.0

R 10.1.0.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 13 subnets, 2 masks

R 10.192.200.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

C 10.10.10.0/30 is directly connected, Port-channel10

R 10.192.100.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

R 10.192.101.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

R 10.192.10.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

R 10.192.2.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

R 10.192.3.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

R 10.192.1.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

C 10.196.2.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan104

C 10.196.3.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan103

R 10.192.4.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

C 10.196.1.0/24 is directly connected, Vlan602

R 10.192.20.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

R 10.0.0.0/24 [120/1] via 10.10.10.2, 00:00:12, Port-channel10

S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.10.10.2

17 Replies 17

...and I just found out from ICMP denug:

trace 10.10.10.131 source 10.196.3.1

*Mar 5 19:00:44.121: ICMP: time exceeded rcvd from 10.10.10.2

*Mar 5 19:00:44.121: ICMP: time exceeded rcvd from 10.10.10.2

*Mar 5 19:00:44.121: ICMP: time exceeded rcvd from 10.10.10.2

*Mar 5 19:00:44.129: ICMP: dst (10.196.3.1) port unreachable rcv from 10.10.10.131

*Mar 5 19:00:44.129: ICMP: dst (10.196.3.1) port unreachable rcv from 10.10.10.131

*Mar 5 19:00:44.138: ICMP: dst (10.196.3.1) port unreachable rcv from 10.10.10.131

Are there any acl's on the svis?

HTH, John *** Please rate all useful posts ***

...no, none

Review Cisco Networking for a $25 gift card