From: Larson, Chris (Contractor) (Chris.Larson@xxxxxx)
Date: Thu Dec 13 2001 - 13:41:20 GMT-3
I have seen this as well however IP Default-network does not always inject a
static route. I forget the exact circumstance that it will not configure a
static route and you can look on CCO. I believe that if the router already
has a route to the network you use in the statement it will not generate a
static. If it doesn't have it in it's routing table then you can advertise a
classfull loopback from another router and distribute into the protocol.
Then configure the default-network on the router using that loopbsck as the
default network.
-----Original Message-----
From: DAN DORTON [mailto:DHSTS68@dhs.state.il.us]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:36 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Opinions on static routes defined.
In some of my practice labs I have of course seen the phrase do not use
any statics to accomplish goals in this lab unless specifically
specified to do so.
In some of these instances the only way to make some of it work is to
either use the IP DEFAULT-NETWORK command ( Which of course creates a
static route, or use the DEFAULT-INFORMATION ORIGINATE ( Which is also
sort of a static injected type route.).
In my mind these commands both fall in the category of statics, but
then in some instance I see no other way. ( Also some of the instances
could be fixed with protocol redistribution, but this is explicitly
denied as well. )
I am just curious about how everyone else feels on this subject.
Please no breaking the NDA as this is not my intent of the question. I
am only wanting personal feeling responses.
Thanks,
Dan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:43 GMT-3