From: Matt Mullen (mullenm@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Feb 09 2007 - 11:30:01 ART
Hi all,
I apologize if this is a topic that has been discussed before, I could not
"For example, IPv4 static routes pointing to a next-hop address have an
Routing TCP/IP Vol 1 Second Edition, Jeff Doyle, Pg. 99
However, it seems that IOS doesn't agree...
Rack1R1(config)#ip route 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 ethernet0/0
Did this change at some point? Does anyone know the history behind this?
Thanks,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Thu Mar 01 2007 - 07:38:46 ART
locate anything in the archives. I have always had the understanding that a
static route which points to an outgoing interface has an Administrative
Distance of 0 while a static route pointing to a next hop has an
administrative distance of 1. Several web sites and books back that up
including http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/105/admin_distance.html
and perhaps the most convincing source:
administrative distance of 1, and static routes referencing an exit
interface have an administrative distance of 0"
Rack1R1(config)#do show ip route 10.10.10.0
Routing entry for 10.10.10.0/24
Known via "static", *distance 1*, metric 0 (connected)
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* directly connected, via Ethernet0/0
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
Matt