1

I have a small network here. The connection from router 1 to router 3 is relevant. I have two questions in one. On the one hand I would be interested, why at Cisco between the routers always this red connection arises. Does this have something to do with WANs? My other question relates to traceroute. The command gives the next router of the connection. How about this example? I am somewhat confused, since I can not exactly assign which IP now belongs to which router (I think this red connection irritates me easy). What the command does is clear to me. Only I can not find straight in the network naming.

My approach would be: Traceroute 192.17.5.0 The output should then be: 192.17.2.0 with XY secs 192.17.7.1 with XY secs

Is this right? Is the router IP the respective input IP?

Sorry for my confusion. I hope you could help me. Thank you very much!

enter image description here

PS: I have often seen this serials S1 and S0, but what are the differences between this serials, why are there two serials? If I imagine how to connect two routers I would use only one serial. so why are there two?

2

Traceroute is used to determine the path between hosts, not between networks. From the PC on the left, you would traceroute to the PC on the right, 192.17.5.x. the result would show you the path used to get from one PC to the other (subject to all the usual disclaimers).

Routers can (and often do) have multiple interfaces. In your diagram, for example, multiple interfaces allow the packet to take an alternate path if one becomes unavailable. That's what routing is all about. It's true, if you only have two routers, you only need one serial interface. But that's not the real world.

I'm afraid I don't understand your question about colors.

  • Thanks for the answer. The task was about routing. There should be specified what can be issued with a traceroute command. Thus, several paths are possible. That's right. I've narrowed this down, since my question is somewhat more elementary. Times I would like to use routing between 2 routers. In the picture Router 1 and Router 3. How is the command for this? Let's say we start routing on router 1: Ip route 192.17.5.0 S1 or Ip route 192.17.5.0 S0 Which of these would be correct? I would say: ip route 192.17.5.0 S1, since we go over S1 after "outside"? – John Schulz Aug 30 '17 at 18:04
  • If you are only using static routes, you should use the command "ip route 192.17.5.0 255.255.255.0 192.17.7.1" Normally, you specify the next hop address, not the interface. The problem with static routes is it does not allow any redundancy, if for example, the link between R1 and R3 fails. That's why we use routing protocols. – Ron Trunk Aug 30 '17 at 18:23
  • Don't forget to add a route on R3 to get back to 192.17.2.0 – Ron Trunk Aug 30 '17 at 18:33
  • Ok this helps me. Sorry I would like to up vote your answer, because its good. But I have not now the permission. If I understand it right the command is: ip route <destination> <subnet> <next hob> ??? I was confused, because in many Internet articles it was like this (ip route 192.17.5.0 255.255.255.0 192.17.7.1"), but in other ressources it was "ip route 192.17.5.0 255.255.255.0 192.17.7.2". But in my opinion X.X.7.2 dont makes sence, because the next hob is X.X.7.1 – John Schulz Aug 31 '17 at 8:55
  • "Don't forget to add a route on R3 to get back to 192.17.2.0", Yes thats right too. From the one direction to the other and switched. – John Schulz Aug 31 '17 at 8:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.