From: Joe (GroupStudy@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Aug 01 2002 - 01:26:10 GMT-3
sure that would work, but the router will waste cpu trying to route packets
to this invalid destination, and this is what the null0 interface was
designed to avoid.
Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Erick B. [mailto:erickbe@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 12:15 AM
To: Joe; 'Peng Zheng'; 'McDermott, Ted'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Static Routes
You can create a permanent static route with an
invalid next hop.
--- Joe <GroupStudy@comcast.net> wrote:
> none that I know
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peng Zheng [mailto:zpnist@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 4:24 PM
> To: Joe; 'McDermott, Ted'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Static Routes
>
>
> What command can be used a substitute for summary
> static route to null0 ?
>
> Thank you for help.
> --- Joe <GroupStudy@comcast.net> wrote:
> > If they won't allow routes to null0, they'll
> > explicitly tell you so, but it
> > would never hurt to ask if there is ambiguity.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> > [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > McDermott, Ted
> > Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 3:27 PM
> > To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> > Subject: Static Routes
> >
> >
> > Frequently, different Cisco Press books use the
> > technique of creating a
> > summary static route to null0 for the purpose of
> > introducing a non-learned
> > route into the routing table. Would that be
> > considered a no-no in the exam,
> > when they stipulate not to employ static routes?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:13 GMT-3