[j-nsp] unreachable indirect next-hop-static

[Stefan Fouant]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of amin amin
> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 7:38 PM
> 
> Can Junos do indirect next-hop static, let me say
> r1-r2-r3-r4
> r4 should reach r1 using static route with gateway 100.100.100.1
> r1 using default route static
> r2-r3-r4 are using ospf protocol area 0
> r1's IP to r2 = 10.10.10.1/30
> r2's IP to r1 = 10.10.10.2/30
> r2's IP to r3 = 100.100.100.1/30
> r3's IP to r2 = 100.100.100.2/30
> r3's IP to r4 = 20.20.20.1/30
> r4's IP to r3 = 20.20.20.2/30
> 
> when I check availble route 10.10.10/30 at r4, it's always shown up.
> but it
> never be reached
> the configuration at r4 for static route
> set routing-option static route 10.10.10/30 next-hop 100.100.100.1
> resolve
> set routing-option forwarding-table indirect-next-hop
> 
> 
> the configuration static route at r1
> set routing-option static route 0/0 next-hop 10.10.10.2

What happens when you do a traceroute?  Based on your configs, I imagine the
packets would get dropped on r3 as there is no route defined on r3 to reach
the 10.10.10/30 subnet.

Also, you do not need to do 'set routing-options forwarding-table
indirect-next-hop'.  That has nothing to do with the 'resolve' keyword under
[edit routing-options static route].  Rather, it is used to improve route
convergence time by abstracting a level of recursion so that fewer route to
forwarding next-hop bindings need to be updated when underlying next-hop
paths are changed.  More details on that can be found via the link below:

http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos92/swconfig-routing/enab
ling-an-indirect-next-hop.html

Stefan Fouant
www.shortestpathfirst.net
GPG Key ID: 0xB5E3803D