Static Route: I have 4 routers and need router 1 to ping router 4?

Favorite Answer

There are a few problems with your setup. (This looks like a homework question.)

1. You should not be using the 169.254 range. That's what Windows plans to automatically use if your DHCP server fails. Stick with the other 3 well-known ranges in the future:  10.*.*.*   172.[16-31].*.*   192.168.*.*

2. R1 and R2 have the same "Loopback 200" IP address. I'm not sure that would work. Maybe R2 was meant to use 10.1.0.254?

3. Not sure why you used a /24 on R1's "router-to-router" connection when a /30 would have worked better and been less wasteful. But ok...

#R1's static routes:

#Route to R2 [FA0/1]...
#ip route 10.104.23.0    255.255.255.0 FA0/1 <--- Is a 'connected' route
ip route 172.16.1.254    255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 10.1.0.254        255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R3 [via R2]...
ip route 169.254.100.0  255.255.255.252 FA0/1
ip route 169.254.5.254  255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 192.168.1.254  255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R4 [via R2]...
ip route 172.29.80.4      255.255.255.252 FA0/1
ip route 169.254.5.1      255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 192.168.1.1      255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#--------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
#R2's static routes:

#Route to R1 [FA0/1]...
#ip route 10.104.23.0  255.255.255.0 FA0/1 <--- Is a 'connected' route
ip route 172.16.1.1      255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 10.1.0.1          255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R3 [FA0/0]...
#ip route 169.254.100.0 255.255.255.252 FA0/0 <--- Is a 'connected' route
ip route 169.254.5.254   255.255.255.255 FA0/0
ip route 192.168.1.254   255.255.255.255 FA0/0

#Route to R4 [via R3]...
ip route 172.29.80.4 255.255.255.252 FA0/0
ip route 169.254.5.1 255.255.255.255 FA0/0
ip route 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.255 FA0/0

#--------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
#R3's static routes:

#Route to R1 [via R2]...
ip route 10.104.23.0  255.255.255.0     FA0/1
ip route 172.16.1.1    255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 10.1.0.1        255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R2 [FA0/1]...
#ip route 10.104.23.0  255.255.255.0     FA0/1 <--- Is a 'connected' route
ip route 172.16.1.254  255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 10.1.0.254      255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R4 [FA0/0]... 
#ip route 172.29.80.4  255.255.255.252 FA0/0   <--- Is a 'connected' route
ip route 169.254.5.1    255.255.255.255 FA0/0
ip route 192.168.1.1    255.255.255.255 FA0/0

#--------------------- ----------------------- -----------------------
#R4's static routes:

#Route to R1 [via R3]...
ip route 10.104.23.0    255.255.255.0 FA0/1
ip route 172.16.1.1      255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 10.1.0.1          255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R2 [via R3]...
ip route 169.254.100.0  255.255.255.252 FA0/1
ip route 172.16.1.254    255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 10.1.0.254        255.255.255.255 FA0/1

#Route to R3 [FA0/1]...
#ip route 172.29.80.4    255.255.255.252 FA0/1 <--- Is a 'connected' route
ip route 169.254.5.254  255.255.255.255 FA0/1
ip route 192.168.1.254  255.255.255.255 FA0/1...Show more

This is why no one uses static routes, you use routing protocols.

I believe you need to define the route to Router 4 as a next-hop on Router 1.  Once the packet gets to router 3, it knows how to get router 4.  I think you also need to define next-hop back on Router 4 to Router 1.

Going from Router 1 to 2, it won't know what to do with packets destined for Router 4.  Same with the back path.  That is why it must be next-hop....Show more