Hi,
here is a little extract of my network,
the situation is: from pppoe server I can ping 172.16.0.2, from 192.168.0.0/24 I can ping 172.16.0.1 but I can’t reach 172.16.0.2 or any other router in that network…
Sounds like 172.16.0.2 doesn’t have a default route pointing through 172.16.0.1.
You can ping .2 from .1 because it’s on the same subnet, and you can ping .1 from 192.168.0.0/24 because that router has network interfaces on both networks and thus has directly connected routes.
but in the 192.168.0.0/24 network gateway I’ve a static route to reach 172.16.0.0/21 trough 192.168.0.2 (ether1 from pppoe server)
Right. Do you have a static route on the 493AH to reach 192.168.0.0/24 through 172.16.0.1? Or a 0.0.0.0/0 default route through 172.16.0.1?
i’ll check that when back to the lab, but, when the rb493 was connected directly to the pppoe server (without the switch) I was able to reach 172.16.0.2 from 192.168.0.0
thanks!
Unless you are running access lists (or something else that could block traffic based on layer 3 information) on the switch I don’t see how that’s possible. On layer 2 a packet sourced from 192.168.0.0/24 traversing the PPPoE server to 172.16.0.2 is going to look the same as 172.16.0.1 going to 172.16.0.2 directly. The PPPoE server would set the source MAC address to itself and the destination MAC address to whatever 172.16.0.2 resolves to via ARP. The only differences would be in layer 3 headers, which a layer 2 switch would ignore.