Re: IE OEQ Question...

Indeed your explanation is perfectly fine. It's definitely not a static
route, just an automatically generated route to catch all traffic not
destined to any more specific prefix.
In the real lab I would also put that line in that it's caused by an EIGRP
summary. Technically only telling that it's routed to the null0 interface
and therefore dropped would be enough, but you want to give the proctor a
good idea of your knowledge :-)

--
Regards,
Rick Mur
CCIE2 #21946 (R&S / Service Provider)
Sr. Support Engineer  IPexpert, Inc.
URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Ryan West <rwest_at_zyedge.com> wrote:
> It's not a static, it's a tie down route from a summary addy. Your
> explanation is fine IMO.
>
> Sent from handheld.
>
> On Aug 29, 2009, at 1:38 PM, "Ronald Johns" <rj686b_at_att.com> wrote:
>
> > I came across a question posed by the IE OEQ simulator that had
> > something like this output displayed:
> >
> >
> >       D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
> >       N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
> >       E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2
> >       i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS
> > level-2
> >       ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user
> > static route
> >       o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route
> >
> > Gateway of last resort is not set
> >
> >     172.16.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
> > C       172.16.1.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback10
> > D       172.16.0.0/16 is a summary, 00:00:39, Null0
> >     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 6 subnets, 2 masks
> > C       10.50.50.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback4
> > C       10.40.40.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback3
> > C       10.30.30.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback2
> > C       10.20.20.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
> >
> >
> > And it asked what the router would do when destined to 172.16.2.0...
> >
> > The answer provided said that it would be dropped due to a static
> > route to Null0 or something like that.  The wording definitely
> > specified "static".
> >
> > My answer was the packet would be null routed which means it will be
> > dropped.
> >
> > I understand the necessity to explain what configuration caused by
> > the route to Null0.  This one is caused by an EIGRP summary address
> > configured one the interface, not a static...  Does anybody know why
> > this route might be considered a static?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ron Johns
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
>
>
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net