Re: [nsp] question on the routing statement.

From: Ryan O'Connell (ryan@complicity.co.uk)
Date: Wed Nov 21 2001 - 09:44:47 EST


On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 09:25:07AM -0500, Tatsuya Kawasaki wrote:
> ip route 3.0.0.0/24 1.1.1.2
> ip route 3.0.0.0/24 2.1.1.2
>
> here is the question of the day, if I use IP addresses of
> the next hop, I noticed EVEN if the interface is down.
> why? It does not make sence.

As long as 1.1.1.2 is reachable by some other means, (e.g. the default route)
then the route is valid. Recursive routes (Routes with next hops pointing to
another route) are perfectly acceptable, BGP uses them by default.

-- 
         Ryan O'Connell - CCIE #8174
<ryan@complicity.co.uk> - http://www.complicity.co.uk

I'm not losing my mind, no I'm not changing my lines, I'm just learning new things with the passage of time



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:24 EDT