Not creating routing loops is what routing protocols are for. It's inherent
to their
design. The reason that it redistributes static routes pointing to
interfaces is that
it considers them connected (they lose their static route status). I have
heard of situations
in which this did this opposite of what you claim - create loops. Ask
Pamela Forsyth.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 12:26 PM
To: Christopher Larson
Cc: 'Stull, Cory'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: ip route question
I would actually like to disagree, the reason for specifying the interface
here is
not so that you can save time, but so that you don't create routing loops.
When an
interface is used with the 'ip route' command, the route is then reliant on
the
availability of this interface. Then, if you were to say, as Cory has done,
specified an ip route for 0.0.0.0 out eth 0, if you kill eth 0, the router
will
try to reach 0.0.0.0 some other way. Also, this command applies to
redistribution. If
you are running IGRP and specify an interface, the route will get
redistributed even
if you don't have static redistribution on. Here is some cco information on
it:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios112/112cg_cr/5rb
ook/5riprout.htm#xtocid9599104
-Ben Smith
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, Christopher Larson wrote:
> It actually saves a step in the processing. When you point to an interface
> the router does not have to lookup what interface to switch out of.
>
> ie. 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 1.1.1.1
>
>
> The router processes for default then looks up 1.1.1.1 to see what
interface
> it is out of then fowards out the interface.
>
> When you tell the router what interface to put it out it saves a step.
> However to answer you question you can do it for all interfaces. At least
I
> have not found an instance where you couldn't.
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stull, Cory [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 12:31 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: ip route question
>
>
>
> I know I'm showing my ignorance here but I'm tired of trying to find the
> answer on CCO. Must be looking in the wrong places.
>
>
> I just saw a Boson question asking about ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int
> ethernet0
>
>
> I thought you could only point static routes like that out of point to
point
> interfaces? For example: ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int ser0
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Cory
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> _________________________________
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
