Using an Equal subnet a transfer-networks - Prefix Suppression

[**Hamid**]

Hi,

As you can see in the picture below, I have three locations connected together. I used the same subnet (192.168.254.252/30) for the point-to-point network but did not advertise this subnet into other locations. Instead, I used static routes to advertise the end network subnets (192.168.1.0/24, 192.168.2.0/24, 192.168.3.0/24) into the Layer 3 network. Everything is working fine, and I can reach all remote networks (192.168.1.0/24, 192.168.2.0/24, 192.168.3.0/24). Do you think this is a good method, or should I use a unique subnet for the point-to-point network at each location?

[MHM Cisco World]

I dont think there is problem 

Static route in site-1 point to subnet 192.168.x.0 on other sites 

MHM

[**Hamid**]

Thank you so much for your response

[M02@rt37]

Hello @MHM Cisco World 

First view, it is functional, as you have demonstrated, and it simplifies subnet allocation... Since you are not advertising the point-to-point subnets into your network and are instead using static routes to advertise only the end network subnet, from my point of view there is no immediate issue with this approach. It keeps the routing tables smaller and ensures that end devices can communicate without unnecessary complexity. If your network is relatively small and static, this method can remain effective.

However, this design might lead to challenges in larger or more dynamic networks. Reusing the same subnet for point-to-point links at multiple locations can make troubleshooting more complex. If there is a need to advertise the point-to-point subnets later, or if the network grows to require dynamic routing protocols, the duplicate subnets could cause routing conflicts or confusion... Unique subnets for each point-to-point link would make the network design more scalable and easier to manage, as each link would be uniquely identifiable.

[MHM Cisco World]

Friend he use static route not IGP so other site will never see this IP conflict of rpute-rpute link subnet.

MHM

[M02@rt37]

Yes sir,

at the moment he uses static...

[**Hamid**]

Thank you so much

[M02@rt37]

You're so welcome.

It's just a tip I added, by prioritizing scalability, you design a network that scales with the organization, ensuring longevity and efficiency.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

"Do you think this is a good method . . ."

Laugh, it all depends.  Do you think looking for a natural gas leak using a lit match also a good method?

Basically, it's an accident waiting to happen.

If you're concerned about address consumption, that's mitigated by using a /30, as you did, or perhaps a /31 for P2P.

Don't recall if it can be used with static routing, but using unnumbered interfaces, for a p2p may be an option.