[c-nsp] ip sla monitor/traceroute source
Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET
ml at t-b-o-h.net
Tue Jul 24 11:24:36 EDT 2007
Hi Rolf,
Ok, will give it a try and report back. I'm pretty sure you'll be
correct. Now I remember that the "ip route" statements originally also
pointed to a interface, and my systems weren't happy. When I changed it
to a next hop/ip it worked perfectly.
Thanks, Tuc
>
> Hi Tuc,
>
> If it was a PtP interface - such as Serial / Frame or other, then you can
> safely use the interface as the "Destination", however when on a multiaccess
> medium (such as ethernet), it is more correct to use the 'Next-Hop' address
> of the device.
>
> (even if there is only a crossover cable between the two).
>
> cheers
> /rolf
>
>
> On Monday 23 July 2007 17:14:48 Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Yes, your correct, I did use the same destination. The
> > article first talks about just the next hop, which should go out
> > the interface where that IP's bound to not causing an issue.
> >
> > There was an example in the article about doing I think
> > something similar. Instead of next hop, they used the interface.
> > On my setup, it looks like :
> >
> > ip local policy route-map LocalPolicy
> > !
> > ip access-list extended PingHUGHES
> > permit icmp host 192.168.0.3 host 204.107.90.128
> > ip access-list extended PingSEABREEZE
> > permit icmp host 192.168.75.49 host 204.107.90.128
> > !
> > route-map LocalPolicy permit 10
> > match ip address PingSEABREEZE
> > set interface Ethernet0/0
> > !
> > route-map LocalPolicy permit 20
> > match ip address PingHUGHES
> > set interface Ethernet1/0
> >
> >
> > Would/should this not be the same?
> >
> > Tuc
> >
> > > For both track destinations you gave the same
> > > ip addresses so the router has one active route
> > > (here the default route) for that destination.
> > > To overcome this situation you can write a route-map
> > > which indicates that for packets with source interface eth0/0
> > > and destination 204.107.90.128 have a next-hop `192.168.75.1 and
> > > write another route-map for packets with source interface eth1/0
> > > and destination 204.107.90.128 have a next-hop `192.168.0.1.
> > > Finally you can apply these route-maps in the form of `ip local policy
> > > route-map` at related ethernet interfaces.
> > >
> > > HTH
> > > Arda
> > >
> > > On 7/14/07, Tuc at T-B-O-H.NET <ml at t-b-o-h.net> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I'm having a weird issue. On my router I have :
> > > >
> > > > ip sla monitor 100
> > > > type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 204.107.90.128 source-interface
> > > > Ethernet0/0 timeout 4000
> > > > frequency 10
> > > > ip sla monitor schedule 100 life forever start-time now
> > > > ip sla monitor 200
> > > > type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 204.107.90.128 source-interface
> > > > Ethernet1/0 timeout 4000
> > > > frequency 10
> > > > ip sla monitor schedule 200 life forever start-time now
> > > > !
> > > > !
> > > > track 100 rtr 100 reachability
> > > > delay down 10 up 20
> > > > !
> > > > track 200 rtr 200 reachability
> > > > delay down 10 up 20
> > > >
> > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.75.1 10 name SEABREEZE track 100
> > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 11 name HUGHES track 200
> > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 251 name HUGHES_FB
> > > > ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.75.1 252 name SEABREEZE_FB
> > > > !
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What I notice is that they are either BOTH up, or BOTH down at
> > > > the same time. Then I noticed the ping times were almost exactly the
> > > > same!
> > > >
> > > > C3640-1#sho ip sla mon st
> > > > Round trip time (RTT) Index 100
> > > > Latest RTT: 696 ms
> > > > Latest operation start time: 08:53:20.321 EDT Sat Jul 14 2007
> > > > Latest operation return code: OK
> > > > Number of successes: 35
> > > > Number of failures: 35
> > > > Operation time to live: Forever
> > > >
> > > > Round trip time (RTT) Index 200
> > > > Latest RTT: 727 ms
> > > > Latest operation start time: 08:53:21.389 EDT Sat Jul 14 2007
> > > > Latest operation return code: OK
> > > > Number of successes: 35
> > > > Number of failures: 35
> > > > Operation time to live: Forever
> > > >
> > > > It should only be this high going over satellite, not wireless.
> > > > So I tried a traceroute using "traceroute 204.107.90.128 source e0/0"
> > > > and "traceroute 204.107.90.128 source e1/0". I noticed that they both
> > > > appeared to take what appeared to be the default route.
> > > >
> > > > Did I follow the directions at
> > > > http://www.nil.si/ipcorner/SmallSiteMultiHoming/
> > > > wrong? Is there something else I need to do to make it go out the
> > > > proper interface?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Tuc
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list