Michail, you can use a different 10.10.10.x IP for f0/0.1 and have 10.10.10.1/32 on the loopback if this helps you. Proxy-ARP might be needed as well.
-- deejay > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:cisco-nsp- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Michael Ulitskiy > Sent: Monday, August 03, 2009 6:23 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IP unnumbered vlan subinterfaces question > > It's not about saving a /32. > This is a CPE device and I was just trying to save myself > administrative burden of maintaining another per-customer static ip > assignment. > I don't need dynamic routing protocol to run on those interfaces, but > thanks for pointing it out anyway. > Ok, if I have to do it then I have to do it. > Thanks everybody, > > Michael > > On Monday 03 August 2009 11:42:09 am Rodney Dunn wrote: > > Don't do it. It's a hack and there are other forwarding plane things > > that don't like it. Read as..it may or may not always work. > > > > Burn another /32 for your loopback. > > > > Rodney > > > > > > > > Aaron wrote: > > > Loopback interfaces do not go down, so I'm not sure what benefit > you are > > > getting besides the ability to blackhole the 10.10.10.0/24 if the > ethernet > > > goes down. > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 11:09, Michael Ulitskiy > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Hello, > > >> > > >> Guys, are there any drawbacks of doing the following: > > >> > > >> interface Lo0 > > >> ip address 10.10.10.1 255.255.255.0 > > >> ! > > >> interface FastEthernet0/0.1 > > >> encapsulation dot1q 1 native > > >> ip unnumbered Lo0 > > >> ! > > >> ip route 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 FastEthernet0/0.1 > > >> ! > > >> > > >> as opposed to having ip address configured directly on the > interface as > > >> usual? > > >> I need that ip address to stay always up regardless of Fa0/0 > state, 'cause > > >> it's used for other services that should stay up > > >> and I'd prefer to avoid assigning another ip address exclusively > for > > >> loopback use. > > >> It seems to work in my lab, but I thought I'd better ask... > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Michael > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> 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/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > > __________ Informacia od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verzia databazy 4300 > (20090803) __________ > > Tuto spravu preveril ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.sk > __________ Informacia od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verzia databazy 4300 (20090803) __________ Tuto spravu preveril ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.sk _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
