From: Denise/Fishburne User (dfishbur@cisco.com)
Date: Thu Feb 07 2008 - 13:20:09 ARST
:)
Sorry... I9m apparently passing on information that is old. :) Used to
work that way.
1) 2004 -- http://tcpmag.com/international/article.asp?EditorialsID=272 -
Scott this will look very familiar to you. Course the date is 2004.
Let9s look at some of the common values:
0 - Directly Connected network or Static route towards an Interface
1 - Static Routes towards an IP address
2) 2002 - CCIE. Routing and Switching Exam Certification Guide
IP Route Administrative Distance
Connected interface 0
Static route directed to a connected interface 0
Static route directed to an IP address 1
On 2/7/08 10:00 AM, "Marc La Porte" <marc.a.laporte@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would disagree with that (and so do the Brian's if I remember the CoD
well).
>
> I setup just a simple FR connection on the main interface using Inverse
ARP,
> with a loopback 2.2.2.2/32 <http://2.2.2.2/32> on R2 to reach via a static
> route
>
> Rack1R1#sh frame map
> Serial1/0 (up): ip 10.0.0.2 <http://10.0.0.2> dlci 102(0x66,0x1860),
dynamic,
> broadcast,, status defined, active
> Rack1R1#
>
>
>>>>> >>>> WITH A STATIC ROUTE TO A NEXT HOP
> Rack1R1#conf t
> Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z.
> Rack1R1(config)#ip route 2.0.0.0 <http://2.0.0.0> 255.0.0.0
> <http://255.0.0.0> 10.0.0.2 <http://10.0.0.2>
>
> Rack1R1#sh ip ro 2.0.0.0 <http://2.0.0.0>
> Routing entry for 2.0.0.0/8 <http://2.0.0.0/8>
> Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> * 10.0.0.2 <http://10.0.0.2>
> Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
>
>
>>>> >>> WITH A STATIC ROUTE TO A PHYSICAL INTERFACE
> Rack1R1#conf t
> Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z.
> Rack1R1(config)#no ip route 2.0.0.0 <http://2.0.0.0> 255.0.0.0
> <http://255.0.0.0> 10.0.0.2 <http://10.0.0.2>
> Rack1R1(config)#ip route 2.0.0.0 <http://2.0.0.0> 255.0.0.0
> <http://255.0.0.0> s1/0
> Rack1R1(config)#^Z
> Rack1R1#sh ip ro 2.0.0.0 <http://2.0.0.0>
> Routing entry for 2.0.0.0/8 <http://2.0.0.0/8>
> Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0 (connected)
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> * directly connected, via Serial1/0
> Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
>
>
> As you can see for both the AD=1, the metric=0... the only difference with
the
> physical interface it's listed as "connected", but it makes no difference
to
> the AD
>
> Marc
>
>
> On Feb 7, 2008 3:48 AM, Denise/Fishburne User <dfishbur@cisco.com> wrote:
>> Static pointing to a physical interface instead of a next hop is actually
an
>> AD of 0.
>>
>>
>> On 2/6/08 12:21 AM, "Germany" <ccie.gergonza@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> > Default AD for static is 1, 0 is for connected... Hey Robert, when you
>>> > labbed it, did you try Josephs scenario (establishing the ospf route
>>> first,
>>> > then setting the static one)?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>>> > Larry
>>> > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 10:21 AM
>>> > To: Joseph Brunner
>>> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>> > Subject: Re: Route preference
>>> >
>>> > Only the static route would be put into the table as its default ad =
0:
>>> >
>>> > r1#show ip route 150.1.3.3 <http://150.1.3.3/>
>>> > Routing entry for 150.1.3.3/32 <http://150.1.3.3/32>
>>> > Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 65, type intra area
>>> > Last update from 150.1.13.3 <http://150.1.13.3/> on Serial1/1,
00:00:26
>>> ago
>>> > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>>> > 150.1.13.3 <http://150.1.13.3/> , from 150.1.3.3 <http://150.1.3.3/>
,
>>> 00:00:26 ago, via Serial1/1
>>> > Route metric is 65, traffic share count is 1
>>> > * 150.1.12.2 <http://150.1.12.2/> , from 150.1.2.2 <http://150.1.2.2/>
,
>>> 00:00:26 ago, via Serial1/0.1
>>> > Route metric is 65, traffic share count is 1
>>> >
>>> > r1#conf t
>>> > Enter configuration commands, one per line. End with CNTL/Z.
>>> > r1(config)# ip route 150.1.3.3 <http://150.1.3.3/> 255.255.255.255
>>> <http://255.255.255.255/> 150.1.13.3 <http://150.1.13.3/> 110
>>> r1(config)#^Z
>>> > r1#show ip route 150.1.3.3 <http://150.1.3.3/> Routing entry for
>>> 150.1.3.3/32 <http://150.1.3.3/32>
>>> > Known via "static", distance 110, metric 0
>>> > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>>> > * 150.1.13.3 <http://150.1.13.3/>
>>> > Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 -larry
>>> >
>>> > On 2/5/08, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Both would be in the routing table. But there will no load balancing
>>>> >> unless cef is disabled (no ip cef). With cef the OLDEST or first
>>>> >> learned route is USED only... so if you want true load balancing
using
>>>> >> the routing table, disable cef.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> josCEF
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>>> >> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
>>>> >> Of Robert CCIE
>>>> >> Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 8:07 PM
>>>> >> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>>> >> Subject: Route preference
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Hello Everyone,
>>>> >> I was just wondering how a router behaves in these situations. If a
>>>> >> router learns a route through a routing protocol but there is a
static
>>>> >> route with the same admin distance configured. Which route would be
>>>> >> installed in the routing table? Or would both be installed? Also,
>>>> >> I'm guessing metrics only matter for that routing protocols process
as
>>>> >> far as calculation since a static route has a metric of 0.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> So, if a router is learning 192.168.1.0/24 <http://192.168.1.0/24>
>>>> through ospf and there is a
>>>> >> static route for 192.168.1.0/24 <http://192.168.1.0/24> with AD of
110.
>>>> Thank you in advance.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> -Robert
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2008 - 16:54:47 ARST