Re: [nsp] 12.0(14)S/new uRPF code

From: George Robbins (grr@netaxs.com)
Date: Sun Jan 07 2001 - 20:53:27 EST


Does a default route count as being "in the table"?

> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 19:32:32 -0600
> From: Basil Kruglov <basil@cifnet.com>
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [nsp] 12.0(14)S/new uRPF code
> Message-ID: <20010107193232.A45684@shell.cifnet.com>
> Reply-To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
>
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 07:24:25PM -0600, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> > >
> > > but is it going to work in asymmetric environment,
> > > when two or more paths to the src are available, or is it going to drop
> > > packets the way 'ip verify unicast reverse-path' did? Thanks,
> > no, the ip verify source reachable via any command only drops if the
> > IP address isn't in the routing table at all.
> >
> > See the archives around 12/19/2000 for a pdf file that explains it
> > nicely.
>
> *sigh* lazy me.. thanks Jared & Larry!
>
> -Basil
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:24 EDT