From: Scott Morris (SMorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Jun 20 1999 - 13:59:29 GMT-3
'Tis my understanding that both would technically work. In a potential loss
of line on serial 0, once converged, the second one would still work
correctly (though presumably out the ethernet interface). On the other
hand, if you changed IPs at all, you'd have to fix the second one, the first
would work regardless...
My guess would be if you get something like that in lab that the first would
be the optimal response...
Scott
smorris@tele-tech.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Derek Fage [mailto:DerekF@itexjsy.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 20, 1999 12:02 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Policy routing question
Hi there,
I'm doing some work with policy routing in my lab (33 days to go), and have
a question about route-maps.
I'm configuring a route-map to so that traffic from a certain subnet will
use a serial connection to get to another subnet instead of the ethernet
connection which has the lowest cost.
I can think of two ways of doing this with the set command, and wondered
when one should be used in preference to the other.
route-map policytest permit 10
match ip address 101
set interface Serial 0
-OR-
route-map policytest permit 10
match ip address 101
set ip next-hop n.n.n.n
Derek...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:21:39 GMT-3