Options

Yet Another Quick Challenge

ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
in CCIE
Maybe I'll start numbering these, lol.

The last one got mixed reviews, so if you guys are into this one I promise I won't make more.:)

R1
R2

R1's interface is 192.168.1.1/24
R2's interface is 192.168.1.2/24

Make R1 respond to pings with the destination 192.168.1.55. Do not change IP addresses, do not set a secondary IP address.

I've come up with two ways, one I think is cooler though. Post or PM if you want, but edit the post if you're right so others have a chance.
http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Options
    acidsatyracidsatyr Member Posts: 111
    Wait, what are rewards for these ? We get some tokens?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    You get to prove to yourself that you have a deep understanding of networking.

    Ps. I responded to your PM. You got one of the ways I came up with, but not the cooler option.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    notgoing2failnotgoing2fail Member Posts: 1,138
    Did you leave the interfaces generic for a reason?

    Meaning you did not mention if the interfaces had to be inside or outside, OR it does not matter at all....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    What do you mean by inside or outside? The link between the two routers has the 192.168.1.0/24 network. We'll say they're fast ethernet interfaces for this scenario, though it doesn't matter much.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    notgoing2failnotgoing2fail Member Posts: 1,138
    Thanks, I've spent the last 30 mins trying to figure this out.

    As just a CCNA, I'm hoping this is something I can figure out. I'm a believer in understanding fundamentals and this is a great question....

    If you feel the topic is beyond the scope of CCNA, please let me know before I pull my hair out...


    When do you plan on revealing the answer?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    I think it's probably beyond the scope of the CCNA, but it's still good that you're trying.

    I'll reveal my answer whenever you guys want.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    APAAPA Member Posts: 959
    Too easy... sending PM now....

    Not quite sure there is a third way without configuring additonal interfaces\secondary IPs (think software interface)...
    CCNA | CCNA:Security | CCNP | CCIP
    JNCIA:JUNOS | JNCIA:EX | JNCIS:ENT | JNCIS:SEC
    JNCIS:SP | JNCIP:SP
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    notgoing2failnotgoing2fail Member Posts: 1,138
    I think my OCD is telling me I need to know the answer.

    But I am going to PM you what I thought might work. And you can tell me what is the answer so others can still try....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    replied to both of you
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    notgoing2failnotgoing2fail Member Posts: 1,138
    I'm ready for the next one!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TurgonTurgon Banned Posts: 6,308 ■■■■■■■■■□
    ColbyG wrote: »
    Maybe I'll start numbering these, lol.

    The last one got mixed reviews, so if you guys are into this one I promise I won't make more.:)

    R1
    R2

    R1's interface is 192.168.1.1/24
    R2's interface is 192.168.1.2/24

    Make R1 respond to pings with the destination 192.168.1.55. Do not change IP addresses, do not set a secondary IP address.

    I've come up with two ways, one I think is cooler though. Post or PM if you want, but edit the post if you're right so others have a chance.

    Add a loopback interface of .55 on R1
    Add a BVI of .55 on R1 (bridge group on R1 and R2)
    I was thinking of the NAT on a stick solution as well.

    Will think of some more when I get a chance. Just got home and lots to do indoors.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    The loopback idea shouldn't work since it's overlapping with the ethernet interface, no?
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    acidsatyracidsatyr Member Posts: 111
    ColbyG wrote: »
    You get to prove to yourself that you have a deep understanding of networking.

    Ps. I responded to your PM. You got one of the ways I came up with, but not the cooler option.

    Both of my solutions work so i think you didn't get the second one.

    So first one is just use nat. Second is use ip alias 192.168.1.55 <some port number> on R1. R1 will answer for that IP and terminate all echos on it, no matter the port. Can't get cooler than that ;)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    Didn't say they didn't work. I just said they're not my way.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    acidsatyracidsatyr Member Posts: 111
    I thought that's what "not sure how alias would work here" means!
    Anyway, there's another way but it involves making serial subinterfaces to work.

    By the way i like these challenges, keep them coming, its a nice review.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    dynamikdynamik Banned Posts: 12,312 ■■■■■■■■■□
    ColbyG wrote: »
    Didn't say they didn't work. I just said they're not my way.

    You sound like my ex-wife :p

    Seriously though, these are cool. Keep it up!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    acidsatyr wrote: »
    I thought that's what "not sure how alias would work here" means!
    Anyway, there's another way but it involves making serial subinterfaces to work.

    By the way i like these challenges, keep them coming, its a nice review.

    No, that was me asking you what you meant, not saying it wouldn't work...
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    dynamik wrote: »
    You sound like my ex-wife :p

    Seriously though, these are cool. Keep it up!

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    notgoing2failnotgoing2fail Member Posts: 1,138
    Ok guys and gals,

    Let's move on to the next quiz!!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    I don't have a next one, lol. These are just random things I think of sometimes.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    acidsatyracidsatyr Member Posts: 111
    ColbyG wrote: »
    No, that was me asking you what you meant, not saying it wouldn't work...

    Ah, ok then didn't gotcha.

    I got couple of more ways but they involve creating subinterfaces or tunnels or even nat on r1 but I'm thinking that's not what you had in mind as far as simplicity goes.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    notgoing2failnotgoing2fail Member Posts: 1,138
    ColbyG wrote: »
    I don't have a next one, lol. These are just random things I think of sometimes.


    Ok, I shall wait patiently then for the next one.....
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    acidsatyracidsatyr Member Posts: 111
    stanby 1 ip 192.168.1.55 ? But that's like setting secondary ip.. What else ...
    Send me PM so i can go to sleep now!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    acidsatyr wrote: »
    stanby 1 ip 192.168.1.55 ? But that's like setting secondary ip.. What else ...
    Send me PM so i can go to sleep now!

    That's it, HSRP/VRRP, etc.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TurgonTurgon Banned Posts: 6,308 ■■■■■■■■■□
    ColbyG wrote: »
    The loopback idea shouldn't work since it's overlapping with the ethernet interface, no?

    I suppose you could try bridging the interfaces and see if that gets over the problem.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    APAAPA Member Posts: 959
    ColbyG wrote: »
    That's it, HSRP/VRRP, etc.


    Oh that is just called plain cheating..... ;)

    That essentially is another IP address.. a virtual IP....

    NAT and Static ARP alias for those who really wanted a challenge... ;)
    CCNA | CCNA:Security | CCNP | CCIP
    JNCIA:JUNOS | JNCIA:EX | JNCIS:ENT | JNCIS:SEC
    JNCIS:SP | JNCIP:SP
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    APAAPA Member Posts: 959
    next quiz.... :D
    CCNA | CCNA:Security | CCNP | CCIP
    JNCIA:JUNOS | JNCIA:EX | JNCIS:ENT | JNCIS:SEC
    JNCIS:SP | JNCIP:SP
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    ColbyGColbyG Member Posts: 1,264
    APA wrote: »
    Oh that is just called plain cheating..... ;)

    That essentially is another IP address.. a virtual IP....

    NAT and Static ARP alias for those who really wanted a challenge... ;)

    I think it fit within the rules.
    http://blog.alwaysthenetwork.com
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Options
    TurgonTurgon Banned Posts: 6,308 ■■■■■■■■■□
    Yes I think HSRP/VRRP is ok. IP alias is a good one too. I looked into that briefly but couldn't get a definitive into if it would work or not. It seems so.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.