From: R. Benjamin Kessler (ben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Dec 20 2001 - 13:58:16 GMT-3
I haven't spun this up in the lab but I would think that if R1 was
configured with "no ip route-cache" and was doing per-packet load-balancing
you'd send every-other packet to R2. This would happen regardless of R2's
up/down status. R1's interface associated with the static route is still up
so the static route is still valid.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
vr4drvr .
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:37 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: OT: Simple static route Q
Here's a static routing question that I need answered. I do have theories,
but I need a proof positive answer. Simple scenario.
R2---10.1.1.0/24
R1----|
R3---10.1.1.0/24
3 routers are connected to an ethernet segment. R1 has 2 static routes to
the 10.1.1.0/24 network pointing to the IP address of the next hop ethernets
on R2 and R3, thereby providing load balancing and fault tolerance. My
question is... if an ethernet interface on R2 was to go down, how does that
affect the routing from R1 to the 10.1.1.0 network? For instance, will R1
drop half the traffic? How does the ARP cache on R1 impact routing, or
rather, how is routing impacted by the ARP cache? Will the static route
through R2 get dropped so to speak?
TIA.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:45 GMT-3