[nsp] is line protocol enough?

• Next message: Jesper Skriver: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Previous message: Everett Dowd: "[nsp] TACACS"
• Next in thread: Jesper Skriver: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Jesper Skriver: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Maybe reply: Christian Panigl, ACOnet/UniVie: "RE: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Scot Donovan Blair: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Steffen Baur: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Glen Shok: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

i came across a strange thing, can someone explain?

2 routers are connected via a serial v.35 (HDLC encapsulation, keepalives are set to 10s). on one end of the line the line protocol
is down and on the other the line protocol stays up (link is up in both ends). a sh/no sh does not help.

the problem is that the static routes pointing towards that interface (with line protocol up) are not removed. traffic is lost! does
this mean that we should never trust the keepalives? should we always let a routing protocol discover link failures?

thanks in advance

-Fabien Berger
IP-Plus Engineering
Swisscom Business Com
www.ip-plus.net

• Next message: Jesper Skriver: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Previous message: Everett Dowd: "[nsp] TACACS"
• Next in thread: Jesper Skriver: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Jesper Skriver: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Maybe reply: Christian Panigl, ACOnet/UniVie: "RE: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Scot Donovan Blair: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Steffen Baur: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Reply: Glen Shok: "Re: [nsp] is line protocol enough?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:07 EDT