three nic routing with windows server 2003

Hello, we are trying to setup three nic routers at multiple locations. The
purpose is to create a mesh radio network connecting our sites together with
a 2 radio redundancy. Each router will have workstations behind it
connecting to NIC1, and NIC2 and NIC3 will connect to different radios and
different routers at other locations.

Router1:
>Nic1-192.168.1.1
>Nic2-192.168.7.1
>Nic3 -192.168.5.1

Router2:
>Nic1-192.168.5.1
>Nic2-192.168.10.1
>Nic3-192.168.7.1

Router3:
>Nic1-192.168.10.1
>Nic2-192.168.9.1
>Nic3-192.168.5.1

We're trying to setup each router using RIP, rather than static routes. But
we're having problems with getting through the routers to each IP segment.
What is the method of getting this three NIC setup to work?

"(E-Mail Removed)"
<(E-Mail Removed) > wrote in message
news:FC700E9C-1F6D-4FFF-9585-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Router1:
>>Nic1-192.168.1.1
>>Nic2-192.168.7.1
>>Nic3 -192.168.5.1
>
> Router2:
>>Nic1-192.168.5.1
>>Nic2-192.168.10.1
>>Nic3-192.168.7.1
>
> Router3:
>>Nic1-192.168.10.1
>>Nic2-192.168.9.1
>>Nic3-192.168.5.1
>
> We're trying to setup each router using RIP, rather than static routes.
> But
> we're having problems with getting through the routers to each IP segment.
> What is the method of getting this three NIC setup to work?

Maybe IP Conflicts out the wazoo?

192.168.5.1 appears twice
192.168.7.1 appears twice
192.168.10.1 appears twice

....unless you meant to describe them as "networks" instead of actual
IP#s,...but you didn't make that clear.

It needs to look like this diagram except that you add a third WAN link
between the two "upper" routers in the diagram,...then enable RIP on each
router.

http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/s...SegmentWAN.jpg

The diagram says "WAN" but it doesn't matter,...the principle is the same
even if they are all in the same room.


--
Phillip Windell

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------
Technet Library
ISA2004
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l...chNet.10).aspx
ISA2006
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l...chNet.10).aspx

Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html

Troubleshooting Client Authentication on Access Rules in ISA Server 2004
http://download.microsoft.com/downlo...7/ts_rules.doc

Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/p...s/default.mspx

Microsoft ISA Server Partners: Partner Hardware Solutions
http://www.microsoft.com/forefront/e...epartners.mspx
-----------------------------------------------------

"Phillip Windell" wrote:

> "(E-Mail Removed)"
> <(E-Mail Removed) > wrote in message
> news:FC700E9C-1F6D-4FFF-9585-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Router1:
> >>Nic1-192.168.1.1
> >>Nic2-192.168.7.1
> >>Nic3 -192.168.5.1
> >
> > Router2:
> >>Nic1-192.168.5.1
> >>Nic2-192.168.10.1
> >>Nic3-192.168.7.1
> >
> > Router3:
> >>Nic1-192.168.10.1
> >>Nic2-192.168.9.1
> >>Nic3-192.168.5.1
> >
> > We're trying to setup each router using RIP, rather than static routes.
> > But
> > we're having problems with getting through the routers to each IP segment.
> > What is the method of getting this three NIC setup to work?
>
> Maybe IP Conflicts out the wazoo?
>
> 192.168.5.1 appears twice
> 192.168.7.1 appears twice
> 192.168.10.1 appears twice
>
> ....unless you meant to describe them as "networks" instead of actual
> IP#s,...but you didn't make that clear.
>
> It needs to look like this diagram except that you add a third WAN link
> between the two "upper" routers in the diagram,...then enable RIP on each
> router.
>
> http://i591.photobucket.com/albums/s...SegmentWAN.jpg
>
> The diagram says "WAN" but it doesn't matter,...the principle is the same
> even if they are all in the same room.
>
>
> --
> Phillip Windell
>
> The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
> or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Technet Library
> ISA2004
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l...chNet.10).aspx
> ISA2006
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l...chNet.10).aspx
>
> Understanding the ISA 2004 Access Rule Processing
> http://www.isaserver.org/articles/IS...cessRules.html
>
> Troubleshooting Client Authentication on Access Rules in ISA Server 2004
> http://download.microsoft.com/downlo...7/ts_rules.doc
>
> Microsoft Internet Security & Acceleration Server: Partners
> http://www.microsoft.com/isaserver/p...s/default.mspx
>
> Microsoft ISA Server Partners: Partner Hardware Solutions
> http://www.microsoft.com/forefront/e...epartners.mspx
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
My Colleage Jeff posted on my behalf, so here is a more detailed drawing and
specific questions. All Ip addresses are somewhat arbritrary, the last octet
can be changed to whatever once the design works out. The Routers are set up
using RIP. All Routers "see" each other ok, but have both routing issues and
the route prints dont look correct.

<a
href="http://s875.photobucket.com/albums/ab318/thephoneguy/?action=view&current=Drawing1.jpg"
target="_blank"><img
src="http://i875.photobucket.com/albums/ab318/thephoneguy/Drawing1.jpg"
border="0" alt="2003 Router Diagram"></a>



Question 1: Do the Physical connections between each router need to be part
of each others subnet? (A to C should be 192.168.1.5 to 192.168.5.5, C to E
Should be 192.168.5.6 to 192.168.10.6, E to D 192.168.10.7 to 192.168.9.8, D
to B 192.168.9.5 to 192.168.7.5 etc)

Qestion 2 (the big Kahuna that I CANNOT find any reference to this ANYWHERE)
is what is the correct default gateway setting for each site. Is it the NIC
IP of the router nearest the Firewall on the internal side or external? is
the the NIC IP of the Local LAN of the Firewall?

Question 3 Does the Local LAn side of each Router need to be added as a
device in the RIP settings (should this side be sending and recieving RIP
broadcasts)?

Thast a good start, as I am going to burn through a lot of man hours doing
process of elimination, as every doc or page ive found either shows the
physical diagram with no details, or details on a 2 Nic scenario.

Any help would be immensly appreciated.

Shayne Noel

Default gateways must be "reachable". That means that the client can reach
the default gateway directly ("on the wire" as we used to say). So the
default gateway of a workstation must be the router interface in the same IP
subnet as the client.

I don't know what you have against static routes, but this is definitely
the best way to set up site to site routing.

The basic thing to remember is that the client should only need a default
gateway setting. It does not need to know where the other machines are or
where the other routers are. If the traffic is not for a machine in the
local subnet (direct delivery using hardware addressing), the packet goes to
the default router. The routers look after it from there on. This machine I
am using can reach any site in the Internet without RIP or any static
routes. It simply sends all non-local traffic to the default router.
Similarly a router only needs to know which router is the next step towards
the final target address.

"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)@discussions.microsoft.com >
wrote in message news:FFF71531-3CFC-4C46-8F60-(E-Mail Removed)...
>

"Bill Grant" wrote:

> Default gateways must be "reachable". That means that the client can reach
> the default gateway directly ("on the wire" as we used to say). So the
> default gateway of a workstation must be the router interface in the same IP
> subnet as the client.
>
> I don't know what you have against static routes, but this is definitely
> the best way to set up site to site routing.
>
> The basic thing to remember is that the client should only need a default
> gateway setting. It does not need to know where the other machines are or
> where the other routers are. If the traffic is not for a machine in the
> local subnet (direct delivery using hardware addressing), the packet goes to
> the default router. The routers look after it from there on. This machine I
> am using can reach any site in the Internet without RIP or any static
> routes. It simply sends all non-local traffic to the default router.
> Similarly a router only needs to know which router is the next step towards
> the final target address.
>
> "(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)@discussions.microsoft.com >
> wrote in message news:FFF71531-3CFC-4C46-8F60-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
>
>
>
So I have edited the drawing to include what I believe will work. Makes
sense about the "on the wire", but I've been changing soo much that I lost
sight of the simple things. So if, lets say the on the 1.x subnet, the Nic
address of the router is 192.168.1.1, the default gateway on this NIC should
aslo be this address? As all clients on the 1.x subnet should come back to
the router.

About the RIP setting, should the local LAN be in the RIP table as a device?
Static routes work, but when you look at the diagram, the whole purpose is
redundancy, having multiple paths to the same router, so any one or two links
can go down and we are still operational as a LAN. If any traffic wants to
hit another subnet (which does happen here) its needs to know how to get
there, and as long as it sees the router, then it should go.

Im benching the settings this am to see what it looks like,and will post
results using DG of NIC ip of same subnet.

"(E-Mail Removed)" <(E-Mail Removed)@discussions.microsoft.com >
wrote in message news:FFF71531-3CFC-4C46-8F60-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Question 1: Do the Physical connections between each router need to be
> part
> of each others subnet? (A to C should be 192.168.1.5 to 192.168.5.5, C to
> E
> Should be 192.168.5.6 to 192.168.10.6, E to D 192.168.10.7 to 192.168.9.8,
> D
> to B 192.168.9.5 to 192.168.7.5 etc)
>
> Qestion 2 (the big Kahuna that I CANNOT find any reference to this
> ANYWHERE)
> is what is the correct default gateway setting for each site. Is it the
> NIC
> IP of the router nearest the Firewall on the internal side or external? is
> the the NIC IP of the Local LAN of the Firewall?
>
> Question 3 Does the Local LAn side of each Router need to be added as a
> device in the RIP settings (should this side be sending and recieving RIP
> broadcasts)?


Every question is clearly shown in the diagram I gave.
If you wanted a "full mesh" the routers in Site A & B would just need an
additional Interface/Subnet between them to create the 3rd WAN link.


--
Phillip Windell

The views expressed, are my own and not those of my employer, or Microsoft,
or anyone else associated with me, including my cats.
-----------------------------------------------------