[c-nsp] prefix-list/route-map quandry

Mark Rogaski wendigo at pobox.com
Wed Feb 8 01:00:16 EST 2006

An entity claiming to be Gert Doering (gert at greenie.muc.de) wrote:
: As far as I understand, all packets that have no explicit route will
: be route just via the normal routing table.  Just as if they are not 
: policy-routed.  Which they aren't.

I stand corrected.  The Cisco docs on PBR and some quick tests on a 2620
back you up.  The behavior I stated would require an explict "set interface


[]                    |  The audiences like to think that satire is doing
[] Mark Rogaski       |  something. But, in fact, it is mostly to leave
[] wendigo at pobox.com  |  themselves satisfied. Satisfied rather than angry,
[] mrogaski at cpan.org  |  which is what they should be.
[]                    |  -- Tom Lehrer
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20060208/e9cc9b5a/attachment.bin

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list