|
|
| djmaplethorpe 2003-08-14, 11:38 am |
| I have a question... After reading and prior experience I am wondering if during the configuration of a static route that you can use the next hop interface instead of the next op ip address? I would think since it is a legal command it is allowed. What say the forum?
djm | |
| edmonds_robert 2003-08-14, 4:04 pm |
| You can do that, but it is usually used in WAN or similar configurations. For example, a branch office that uses a point-to-point T1 to connect to corporate. You could use the following:
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 serial 0 | |
| Yankee 2003-08-14, 8:18 pm |
| that's actually the directly connected interface not the next hop interface.
Yankee | |
| edmonds_robert 2003-08-14, 10:44 pm |
| True, but if it's a point-to-point link, the only interface it could possibly go to is the next hop. However, you are correct. So, I guess the answer to the original question would be no, since the interface names are only locally significant. The configuration in my previous example accomplishes the same thing, though. | |
| darthfeces 2003-08-14, 11:09 pm |
| yes
yankee's right
serial0 is the local interface
by forwarding the pactets there they will make it
to the other end provided layer1 and 2 are up
your options are
local interface or next hop
local interface does not use recursive routing lookup or arp
and the next hop option does. | |
| djmaplethorpe 2003-08-15, 1:56 pm |
| thanks all, this does help clear it up.
djm |
|
|
|