Just being picky, but I can't see how static routing would give you faster 
traffic transmission than dynamic routing. The router still looks into the 
routing table and finds a route for the first process-switched packet. From 
then on it uses the fast-switching cache, (unless configured not to do so.) 
But just because it's a static route instead of a dynamic route doesn't 
make it any faster.

Static routing uses less bandwidth because no routing updates are sent, but 
that's a different concern. Also, dynamic routing protocols can be slow to 
converge when problems occur, but fast-converging protocols such as EIGRP 
and OSPF wouldn't have this problem. Also, if you just have single links 
and no redundancy, there's nothing to converge to anyway.

Static routes will work but could get cumbersome to configure and maintain 
as your network grows. Also, do the branch offices just need to get to the 
central office, or do the branches talk to each other? If so, a default 
route or a routing protocol might be a better option to avoid having to 
specify each network.

Priscilla

>----Original Message Follows----
>From: jeongwoo park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: jeongwoo park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: static route question ??
>Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2000 07:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
>
>HI all.
>Situation:
>There is a central site in San Francisco, and four
>branches around Bay area.
>Since static route gives us faster traffic
>transmission, would it be the most desirable way to
>configure static route on all routers, regardless
>whether it is a central site router or branch office
>router?
>If not, why not?
>
>Thanks in adv.
>
>jeongwoo
>


________________________

Priscilla Oppenheimer
http://www.priscilla.com

**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to