06-05-2008 11:14 AM - edited 03-03-2019 10:15 PM
Not so much a problem as it is an observation. Has anyone had a problem creating a static route with a distance metric of 255 being inserted into the routing table? Does anyone know why a static route with a distance metric of 255 might not be placed in the routing table?
06-05-2008 11:27 AM
As far as i know an admin distance of 255 means the route is unreachable so the route will not be inserted into the routing table.
Jon
06-05-2008 11:33 AM
Thanks Jon. I couldn't track down any information on it, but do you know why you'd ever want to put a route in like that if indeed 255 does make it unreachable?
06-05-2008 11:39 AM
Daniel
To be honest no, nothing really occurs at the moment. I certainly haven't used an AD of 255 but perhaps there are others who may have some input.
Jon
06-05-2008 12:06 PM
Daniel and Jon
It has been a while and I do not remember the details clearly but there was a situation in which we wanted to run a dynamic routing protocol with a router (which we did not control) and we wanted it to receive and process our updates but we did not want to put its routes into our routing table. Of the several alternatives that we considered the optimum choice was to set the Administrative Distance of the routes received from that neighbor to 255 which prevented them from being inserted into our routing table.
And the AD that is used by dynamic routing protocols is the same AD used for floating static routes.
One technical nit: an AD of 255 does not make the network unreachable. It makes the route not trustworthy enough to be inserted into the routing table.
06-05-2008 12:16 PM
Thanks for explaining Richard. That makes a lot of sense. I bet that's the answer I'm looking for.
Thanks again.
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: