Re: Setting routes w/ set next hop verify-availability in IOS 12.2
- From: ttripp <ttripp@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 05:34:56 -0800 (PST)
On Feb 11, 5:49 pm, "Thrill5" <nos...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"ttripp" <ttr...@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:19ad57e0-513b-47ac-9f23-9945270c5152@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I'm trying to set up a 6509 switch with a MSFC2 card to route based on
the reachability of one of two outbound routers. I've set up this
sort of thing using:
ip sla monitor 1
type echo protocol ipicmpEcho 10.100.20.5
frequency 15
ip sla schedule 1 start-time now life forever
track 1 rtr 1 reachability
ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.255 10.100.20.5 track 1
on routers that have IOS 12.3 or later. What I'm doing is monitoring
10.100.20.5 with pings, and if the pings work, I'm adding a static
route for a particular host pointing to 10.100.20.5. If the ping
fails, then the static route is remove and the host uses whatever
entry is in the routing table. I've used this approach before
successfully.
Unfortunately, the version of IOS available for the MSFC2 tops out at
12.2, so I can't use this particular solution.
I've come across an older tracking method that is compatible with
12.2, but I'm not sure about its behavior. This is what I've found:
track 123 rtr 1 reachability
interface vlan0
ip address 10.100.30.1 255.255.255.0
ip policy route-map alpha
route-map alpha permit 10
match ip address "ACL-Including-x,x,x,x"
set ip next-hop verify-availability 10.100.20.5 10 track 123
rtr 1
type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 10.100.20.5
rtr schedule 1 life forever start-time now
I think that will do what I want, setting the next hop for that
particular host if there is a good ping to that specific outbound
router. What I'm not clear on is, what happens if the ping fails?
Will the host then just use whatever route is in the MSFC2's routing
table, or will it not have any route at all and the packets from the
host just drop?
Thanks in advance.
The route map will override the normal routing for that subnet. If the sla
monitor says that the router is available then it set the next-hop to
10.100.20.5, otherwise it will send it to where the routing table says it
should go. I'm curious as to what you are trying to accomplish. Why aren't
you running a routing protocol on 10.100.20.5 or just using a static or
floating-static route?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'm trying to load-balance voice/video traffic across multiple MPLS
connections and 7200 routers running OSPF without getting into BGP.
Using sla will let me point specific videoconferencing units out
specific routers, while letting those same units fail over to using
the OSPF routing table if a specific MPLS connection goes down. It's
a bit convoluted, but BGP would be even more convoluted.
Of course, if you've got a better solution, I'd sure like to hear it.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Filter Switch Port Traffic?
- Next by Date: Re: Setting routes w/ set next hop verify-availability in IOS 12.2
- Previous by thread: Re: Setting routes w/ set next hop verify-availability in IOS 12.2
- Next by thread: Re: Setting routes w/ set next hop verify-availability in IOS 12.2
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
