> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:juniper-nsp- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of amin amin > Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 7:38 PM > > Can Junos do indirect next-hop static, let me say > r1-r2-r3-r4 > r4 should reach r1 using static route with gateway 100.100.100.1 > r1 using default route static > r2-r3-r4 are using ospf protocol area 0 > r1's IP to r2 = 10.10.10.1/30 > r2's IP to r1 = 10.10.10.2/30 > r2's IP to r3 = 100.100.100.1/30 > r3's IP to r2 = 100.100.100.2/30 > r3's IP to r4 = 20.20.20.1/30 > r4's IP to r3 = 20.20.20.2/30 > > when I check availble route 10.10.10/30 at r4, it's always shown up. > but it > never be reached > the configuration at r4 for static route > set routing-option static route 10.10.10/30 next-hop 100.100.100.1 > resolve > set routing-option forwarding-table indirect-next-hop > > > the configuration static route at r1 > set routing-option static route 0/0 next-hop 10.10.10.2
What happens when you do a traceroute? Based on your configs, I imagine the packets would get dropped on r3 as there is no route defined on r3 to reach the 10.10.10/30 subnet. Also, you do not need to do 'set routing-options forwarding-table indirect-next-hop'. That has nothing to do with the 'resolve' keyword under [edit routing-options static route]. Rather, it is used to improve route convergence time by abstracting a level of recursion so that fewer route to forwarding next-hop bindings need to be updated when underlying next-hop paths are changed. More details on that can be found via the link below: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos92/swconfig-routing/enab ling-an-indirect-next-hop.html Stefan Fouant www.shortestpathfirst.net GPG Key ID: 0xB5E3803D _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
