[c-nsp] Adding connected routes in a VRF

Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) oboehmer at cisco.com
Mon Dec 8 15:24:54 EST 2008

Ross Vandegrift <> wrote on Monday, December 08, 2008 20:31:

> ip route Vlan1234
> However, there's a syntax ambiguity when you place this in a VRF,
> since this is how you leak traffic out of a VRF:
> ip route vrf foobar Vlan1234
> % For VPN routes, must specify a next hop IP address if not a
> point-to-point interface 
> Is there any way to get the global table behavior in a VRF?

No, the next-hop address is required..


P.S: I guess we would also require this for global if we implemented
this today..

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list