From: vr4drvr . (adrian36@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Dec 20 2001 - 14:30:28 GMT-3
That is another scenario I would look at, but if you specify the local
router interface then you have no control over how the routing is directed
to the other routers which is an important element in my requirements. This
does bring up a good question though, how do the other two routers respond
to the packets sent out from R1 in this scenario, since there is no next hop
IP address in the packet? Will both routers pick up the packet, knowing
that they have a route to the destination thereby resulting in 2 packets
being sent to the destination?
>From: Jason Gardiner <gardiner@sprint.net>
>To: "R. Benjamin Kessler" <ben@kesslerconsulting.com>, "vr4drvr ."
><adrian36@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: Re: Simple static route Q
>Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 12:24:02 -0500
>
>That's why you set the statics to the interface rather than the next hop
>ip.
>
>On Thursday 20 December 2001 11:58 am, R. Benjamin Kessler wrote:
> > 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