[c-nsp] Floating static routes, Etherchannel, and HSRP

[Afsheen Bigdeli]

> Ok, so as an example, your end of the connection might be 192.168.1.1 and
> the ISP's would be 192.168.1.2 and you are using the .2 as the nexthop.
> Correct?


Yes, that's correct.

> The only time I'd expect to see the floating static in the table is if
> reachability to the ISP nexthop address on switch 1 wasn't present.  Since
> you are pointing at an IP address of a route on a directly connected
> interface, the only time the route would not be present is when that
> interface is down.  So that being the case, are you testing this by
> shutting down the interface that is connected to the ISP?

Nope. Both links are up at the moment.


> A better solution here would probably be to put a default route on each
> switch pointing to its respective ISP nexthop address and use the "standby
> track" feature to adjust the HSRP gateway address based on the status of
> the ISP interface.  When the interface goes down, the HSRP priority would
> be adjusted so that instead of switch1 being the default gateway, switch 2
> would become the default gateway.  Additionally, with Enhanced Object
> tracking, you can even monitor the IP reachability over the ISP connection
> and make adjustments based on reachability in addition to interface status.


Heh, I'd actually just started doing that as a workaround... I'd still 
like to know _why_ floating static routes aren't working, but the track 
option gives me quite a bit more flexibility in terms of what actions I 
can take based on what criteria, etc., so I think I may stick with it. 
Now to test all of my failure scenarios again....

(The maddening thing is that I have this same config in another 
environment, with the only differences being that the link to the second 
switch is in access mode, not a trunk, and it's a regular link, not an 
Etherchannel. I'm going to test those two points when I get a chance.)

--afsheenb