I'll second Adams point -- BGP will only announce your static route if it's already in your routing table.
There's a caveat though: The static route might well be in your routing table even when you'd expect it to have disappeared. A static route pointing to a host on a connected interface might survive even if the interface goes down, since a recursive routing lookup might find another way to the host, like a supernet of the connected net. (Add an interface to the static route would make this problem go away, but that's not always an option.) If what you want to check isn't wether there's a valid route to the next hop (which would make the static valid), but if the next hop is "reachable" and a more "pingable"-like sense then you're in different situation. Depending on your platform, "Reliable Static Routing Backup Using Object Tracking" (http://tinyurl.com/67pawg) might be worth reading. (Or convince Cisco to implement BFD for static routes in regular IOS...) Regards, Peter On Wed, 2008-04-23 at 18:21 +0100, Adam Armstrong wrote: > Gary Roberton wrote: > > All > > > > I have a static route that I am redistributing into BGP. However, I only > > want to redistribute it if the next hop is available. For example, if I > > have ip route 88.0.0.0 255.0.0.0 10.35.1.1, I only want to redistribute it > > if the 10.35.1.1 next hop is still available. I won't go into detail here > > unless it looks like I need to. > > > Is this not default behavior already? > > If the next-hop for the static goes away (if an interface went down, for > example), the static would be removed and thus the BGP announcement > would go away? > > adam. > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
