Adding a DSL route to a Cisco 2611 router

that you are saying you can disconnect the cable that connects the Cisco interface Ethernet0/1 to the DSL router and still ping the router (75.160.162.126)?

Can you post the complete configuration?

telnet session console session or a host on the LAN?

I'm wanting to include this new connection in the load balancing, and the DSL circuit does nut use PPPoE. Following is the output from the commands you've requested:

show interface Ethernet0/1:

Ethernet0/1 is up, line protocol is up
Hardware is AmdP2, address is 0002.fd45.b361 (bia 0002.fd45.b361)
Description: Qwest 7Mbps DSL - Internet
Internet address is 75.160.162.65/26
MTU 1500 bytes, BW 7168 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec,
reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255
Encapsulation ARPA, loopback not set
Keepalive set (10 sec)
ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
Last input 00:00:16, output 00:00:00, output hang never
Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 0
Queueing strategy: fifo
Output queue :0/40 (size/max)
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
36160 packets input, 2179058 bytes, 0 no buffer
Received 35802 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored
0 input packets with dribble condition detected
41247 packets output, 3924136 bytes, 0 underruns
1142 output errors, 0 collisions, 7 interface resets
0 babbles, 0 late collision, 9 deferred
1142 lost carrier, 0 no carrier
0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out

show ip route:

Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP
D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP
i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS inter area
* - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR
P - periodic downloaded static route

Gateway of last resort is 0.0.0.0 to network 0.0.0.0

172.16.0.0/28 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O 172.16.41.0 [110/15] via 204.120.160.1, 1d22h, Ethernet0/0
204.120.160.0/24 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
C 204.120.160.0/29 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
C 204.120.160.168/30 is directly connected, Serial0/0
192.168.255.0/29 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 192.168.255.0 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
63.0.0.0/30 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 63.166.59.188 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0
208.35.255.0/24 is variably subnetted, 3 subnets, 2 masks
O 208.35.255.0/28 [110/15] via 204.120.160.1, 1d22h, Ethernet0/0
O 208.35.255.48/28 [110/15] via 204.120.160.1, 1d22h, Ethernet0/0
O 208.35.255.64/26 [110/15] via 204.120.160.1, 1d22h, Ethernet0/0
75.0.0.0/26 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C 75.160.162.64 is directly connected, Ethernet0/1
S* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, Serial0/0
[1/0] via 63.166.59.190

Serial0/0 is a point-to-point 1.544Mbps line connected connected to an AdTran TSU LT, then out via T1.

Serial0/1 is not connected to anything and is unused.

Ethernet0/0 is connected to a switch and the rest of our network

Ethernet0/1 is connected to the DSL router which I want to configure as an additional, load-balanced gateway to the Internet.

FastEthernet1/0 is a connected to a different DSL router, over which traffic is passing just fine.

of the gateway on ethernet0/1 instead of the interface...I believe it was .126.

then run "show ip route 0.0.0.0"

Okay... I found some additional information I find interesting (perhaps puzzling). I added the route using the gateway address (75.160.162.126/26) with the following command:

ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 75.160.162.126

I then removed the other routes to see if traffic was flowing. I tried a ping through a computer on the network and found no packets getting through. The interesting part is that, from the Cisco router, I was unable to ping names, but able to ping IP addresses:

ping google.com:

Translating "google.com"...domain server (204.120.163.4) (208.35.255.89)
% Unrecognized host or address, or protocol not running.

ping 74.125.45.100:

Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 74.125.45.100, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 96/97/100 ms

Now I'm confused, as both DNS servers are allowed through access-list 120. I checked the output from the "show ip route" command before and after running these pings.

Before:

Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet
Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0, candidate default path
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 75.160.162.126
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1

After (I also put the other routes back in):

Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet
Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0 (connected), candidate default path
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 75.160.162.126
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
directly connected, via Serial0/0
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
directly connected, via FastEthernet1/0
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1

because the router will send traffic to the lowest value 10 vs 99 10 will always get traffic.

the command ip load-sharing per-packet with both routes having and equal metric is basically one for me, one for you.

so all traffic on the LAN will be equally distributed over the 2 routes.

I changed the routes to include the metric now. The ip routes are as follows:

ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 63.166.59.190 10
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/0 10
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Ethernet0/1 10

Computers on the network are now receiving approximately 33% packet loss, indicating that the new route is failing. I also used the IP of the gateway, as follows:

ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 63.166.59.190 10
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Serial0/0 10
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 75.160.162.126 10

And, with this configuration, I receive a full 100% packet loss from devices on the network.

Try running "clear ip cef *" you may have to use this "clear ip cef * prefix-statistics". See if that makes a difference.

I tried the first command, but it gave me a syntax error. The second command worked, but I was still unable to pass traffic over the new line.

I ought to take some time and just thank you guys for your assistance and patience with this problem; it is extremely appreciated!

while your config says line up protocol up, I think the problem resides on that interface. Is this a direct connection to a DSL modem? or is there another device in there? are you doing PAT on that interface?

somethings has to do PAT.

I can connect a laptop computer with the same IP information (75.160.162.65/26) to the DSL router and pass traffic fine using the 75.160.162.126 address as a gateway. When it is hooked up to the Cisco 2611, though, there are no other devices between them; it's a direct connection via ethernet cable.

I'm sorry for being such a newbie to Cisco, but I'm totally unfamiliar with PAT, and would assume, since I don't see it explicitly stated, that it is not being used. How could I check if I were?

while I was driving home. When you removed the other routes and added the one route going over the ethernet0/1 interface, I'll bet you didn't remove the "ip load-sharing per-packet" config from that interface.

Since your goal is to get traffic going over this interface and ultimately only this interface, let's try to making it work correctly as a stand-alone route to the internet first. Once we know that works properly, we can add back the load sharing config.

So I suggest reoving the load sharing config and configuring that interrface as the lone route to 0.0.0.0 and let's see where we stand and do any trouble-shooting necessary from there.

something has to do many to one network address translation between host addresses and your routable public address. Many to one NAT

IP NAT inside or IP NAT outside commands.

you mention this : "I can connect a laptop computer with the same IP information (75.160.162.65/26) to the DSL router "

so the question is what does the ethernet port for the DSL connection on the 2600 connect to? a DSL modem or a DSL router. If it's a DSL router in half bridge mode, then your 2600 interface has to act as a WAN interface with an IP, Subnet Mask, DNS servers, default gateway.

So you need outside ip, DNS and gateway addressing and a subinterface for inside stuff. Probably use the same inside interface addressing scheme 192.X.X.X as the other interface.

Then use the packet metrics to load balance.