Ryan O'Connell <ryan@complicity.co.uk> writes:
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2001 at 04:21:12AM +0100, Martin Cooper wrote:
>
> > I have three routers, each of which has directly-connected
> > interfaces to a Vlan812 and a static pointing to a connected
> > next-hop out of that interface. The statics on two of the
> > routers (down-3 & cent-8) have their admin distances set to
> > 200. Vlan812 is up on all the routers. The statics are covered
> > by OSPF 'network' statements, and also redistributed as external
> > type E1 routes.
>
> [snip]
>
> The admin distance of you've set on your statics (200) is higher
> than the admin distance of OSPF, so OSPF will be preferred. It
> looks like down-3 isn't learning the OSPF route for some reason.
Just to follow this up, now I've solved
it, in case it's useful to anyone else...
The problem seems to have been that OSPF would not reinstall the
redistributed static route (as seen from the primary router over
the backbone via OSPF) into the local routing table owing to the
fact it was preferring its self-originated redistributed static.
The solution was to lower the base-metric of redistributed static
routes on the primary router from 20 to 15 ("redistribute static
metric 15 metric-type 1 subnets"). The other requirement was to
ensure the OSPF costs on the backbone interfaces were set lower
than the Vlan812 interfaces, to ensure that traffic was not sent
via the directly-connected interfaces, except for on the primary
router.
The object of the exercise was to get symmetric routing within
an HSRP group, even though this results in a longer path to the
LAN from directly-connected routers that are in standby mode.
Cheers,
M.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:53 EDT