Re: Need your Advice guys

From: Luca Hall (lhall@setnine.com)
Date: Wed Dec 17 2008 - 16:11:30 ARST

i mean to say, if thats how they have it setup and they tell you that
it works fine and you dont believe them then ask them to take the
interface down, or wait till some time when it wont disrupt anything
and take it down yourself, that will make it route via the 3750.
from here you will know 100% if it works or not.

----- Original Message -----
From: shiran guez <shiranp3@gmail.com>
To: Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com>
Cc: Cisco certification <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wed, 17 Dec 2008 12:57:24 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Need your Advice guys

This is not the question, it is not my design or implementation or solution,
the question is if it is a legal routing action or not and if it is a legal
action (I think not, unless there is one of the other cases I have
mentioned)!

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:42 PM, Joseph Brunner <joe@affirmedsystems.com>wrote:

> I think it's a bad design all together and should be migrated away from
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> shiran guez
> Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2008 12:28 PM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: Need your Advice guys
>
> Hi
>
> I am loosing my mind here with a scenario I have here:
>
>
> CAT3750 have 3 vlans interfaces
>
> for example sake:
>
> # Incoming traffic from LAN
> vlan 10
> # Incoming traffic from WAN
> vlan 20
> # HSRP VLAN WITH Second Network Appliance
> vlan 30
>
> on vlan 10 and 20 there is a PBR set based on match from source x to route
> next hop HSRP virtual IP
>
> v10 v20
> --------> CAT3750 <---------
> ^
> | v30
> |
> NETWORK Appliance
> Now my argument is that as long as hsrp active status is the Network
> Appliance there is no problem but when the Cat3750 will become active then
> that mean that next hop is his own connected Interface and that is not a
> legal routing action.
>
>
> But why am I sending this out to the group?! well I got some SE's in my
> company that are saying hey this is the way we work for several years now
> and we have an official document that was issued to us ( by a former
> employee in my company, note also a CCIE) that this should work.
>
> Well as long as I can remember this is not a legal routing action unless it
> is pointing to a loopback interface where then I would use a PBR under the
> global config to intercept local generated traffic and may be do a NAT or
> some other stupid router tricks.
>
> Please correct me if I am loosing my mind here as sometime when several
> people tell you something you start to loose your own confidence in your
> knowledge.
>
>
> Thank you all in advanced
>
> --
> Shiran Guez
> MCSE CCNP NCE1 JNCIA-ER CCIE #20572
> http://cciep3.blogspot.com
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 

-- 
Shiran Guez
MCSE CCNP NCE1 JNCIA-ER CCIE #20572
http://cciep3.blogspot.com
http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:09 ARST