I've got to setup a server and router in a data centre's rack for a friend of mine. Here's the basic setup:
[server] ==> [cisco 5505] ==> [data centre]
The cisco 5505 is there to provide a vpn connection to a company my friend does a lot of work with and is something we were told to get as it's the only thing they support. Personally I'd have thought that it could have been done much more easily and cheaply with a software client but it's out of our control
the server behind the 5505 is on a 172... private subnet specified by the company who control the VPN.
Anyway, the data centre has given us a /30 subnet and my question is this:
a /30 has 4 ip addresses in it with 2 being usable, does that mean one address will go on the outside interface of my 5505 while the other is used by the data centre's router (so the data centre's router's address will also be my router's default gateway)?
The information I've been given is that our ip range is:
and that our gateway address is:
which says to me that I should set the 5505 with an IP of:
x.y.z.230 and default route x.y.z.229
What has me slightly confused is that my friend told me that he'd requested 2 addresses from the data centre and this setup means he can only use one... so either I've not understood something or he didn't get what he asked for, or perhaps both! I thought this kind of setup was used for point to point connections like leased lines rather than inside a data centre.
The 2nd address isn't actually that important as he thought he'd be able to use one for the 5505 and one for the server behind it so that he could bypass the 5505 if he messed it up. As the server has 2 nics he thought he'd be able to connect one to the inside of the 5505 and one directly to the data centre. After I got him to check how much the data centre would charge for a second network port he quickly dropped the idea
any suggestions are appreciated.
BTW, are Cisco routers the best things ever or just over expensive employment opportunities for Cisco engineers? This is my first real run it with them and while I can see they are obviously well made and highly configurable they do seem to be complete gits to setup. Probably what has annoyed me the most are the endless variations on ios that make finding information for any single device a bit tricky.