[c-nsp] bridging and reachability question

[Scott Granados]

Hi, I've got what might be a basic question but I'm some what baffled.

 

I have 2 cisco routers, 1 cisco 2621 and 1 1721.

The 2621 has a t1 wicc installed and is connected to two networks,
10.0.1.x and 10.0.3.x.  Fast eth0 is attached to the 10.0.1.x network
and fast 1 to the 10.0.3.x network.  The T1 travels to our offices and
terminates on another wicc in the 1720.  The 1720 has two interfaces in
addition to the wicc, eth0 with is a 10 meg Ethernet add on card and
fast 0.  Fast 0 is attached to the 192.168.1.x network and eth0 is
attached to a different switch where we have 10.0.1.x machines connected
(in the office).

 

I have the two Ethernet ports fast0 on the 2621 and eth0 (10 meg) on the
1720 each in a bridge group, bridge 1.  I then have a bvi interface on
each end one (1720) is 10.0.1.251 and the other (2621) is 10.0.1.252.

 

I also have both T1 interfaces in the same bridge group (one on each
end)

 

The remaining network interfaces (fast0 1720) and (fast 1) 2621 are not
in bridge groups, have unique ip addresses and iprouting is enabled on
both boxes.  

 

Now, from the 1720's command line I can ping most other machines in the
bridge or 10.0.1.x group, all the machines in the 10.0.3.x network (with
proper static routes applied) and however I can't ping 10.0.1.1.  This
ip 10.0.1.1 is a sonicwall pro5060 and it's located at the far end of
the t1, in the data center, and closest to the 2621.  The 2621 can ping
this address with out any issue but the 1721 can't.  It also seems like
the other members of the bridge group I.E work stations at my office can
ping the far end sonicwall.  What's up wit it?:)

 

 

 

This is posing a problem because static routes I add in the 192 block
through the fw don't seem to work.  (I have ping enabled and a rule to
allow all for testing to make sure the sonicwall isn't blocking
something with a rule)

 

 

Thoughts?

 

Thanks everyone for your time.

 

Scott