Deepak Jain [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In the old days, null was handled by CPU (software switched), so lots
of us old-timers got into the habit of using loopback instead of
null. On a modern platform it should make no operational difference
provided you have everything you need set up
loopback or another interface (usually a static route of last resort
to the loopback address/interface).
loopback or null?
In the old days, null was handled by CPU (software switched), so lots
of us old-timers got into the habit of using loopback instead of null.
On a modern platform it
On Tuesday 10 June 2008, Deepak Jain wrote:
In the old days, null was handled by CPU (software
switched), so lots of us old-timers got into the habit of
using loopback instead of null. On a modern platform it
should make no operational difference provided you have
everything you need set up
Running 12.2(33)SXH on sup 7203CXL in 6500
I have 3 full BGP peers and I am announcing our internal nets which
include 128.112.0.0.
The BGP statement has the net...
network 128.112.0.0
For some unknown reason we stop announcing the 128.112.0.0/16 to all
our ISPs. This is the second
Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
For some unknown reason we stop announcing the 128.112.0.0/16 to all our
ISPs. This is the second time it has happened in about 2 months.
To get things going again I have to remove the BGP network 128.112.0.0
statement and just add it again.
Jeff,
What did your
Justin Shore wrote:
Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
For some unknown reason we stop announcing the 128.112.0.0/16 to all
our ISPs. This is the second time it has happened in about 2 months.
To get things going again I have to remove the BGP network
128.112.0.0 statement and just add it again.
Deepak Jain wrote:
Justin Shore wrote:
Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
loopback or another interface (usually a static route of last resort to
the loopback address/interface).
loopback or null?
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
The /16 net has subs on multiple interfaces and also my loopback. I
did as you mentioned, by looking at what was being advertised to my
peers, that's how I knew what the problem was to begin with.
It's also strange that it has been the same net in both incidences,
even though there is
Null is better save, for my floating static route.
a. rahman isnaini.r.sutan
Joe Maimon wrote:
Deepak Jain wrote:
Justin Shore wrote:
Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
loopback or another interface (usually a static route of last resort
to the loopback address/interface).
loopback or null?
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Jeff Fitzwater wrote:
The /16 net has subs on multiple interfaces and also my loopback. I did as
you mentioned, by looking at what was being advertised to my peers, that's
how I knew what the problem was to begin with.
...
One thing we do often is add null routes and we
10 matches
Mail list logo
