[c-nsp] Different behaviour for static route on different IOS?

[Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)]

> On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 10:18:33AM +0100, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
> wrote: 
>> The behavior reported by Gert in 12.0 with "classful" route looks
>> like a corner case (i.e. "ip route 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
>> 192.168.20.1" and the only route known is 192.168.0.0/16.
> 
> Indeed, it's not "classful", but a more generic check "if the route
> prefix *and* the gateway IP are part of the *same* supernet route
> (/16, default route, ...) --> suppress recursive static route".

coz it wouldn't make much sense, would it?

you learn 192.168/16 via POS0/0, and you enter a static route for
192.168.20/24 pointing to a nexthop within 192.168/16, all traffic to
192.168/16 (including 192.168.20/24) would still go out POS0/0. 

> So the actual surprise might come from the difference between
> 
>   ip route 10.10.10.0/24 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1
> 
> and
> 
>   ip route 11.11.11.0/24 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.1
> 
> the first one is ignored if all you have is a route to "10.0.0.0/8"
> (because route and gateway IP are both part of 10.0.0.0/8), while the
> second one will be installed just fine.

because it adds routing information.. I don't really find this
surprising..

	oli