"we" have a Catalyst 3750 switch on which we configured 2 static routes. See attachment for the logical design.
We configured the following static routes:
ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.0.0 10.0.0.11
ip route 192.168.64.0 255.255.255.0 10.0.0.12
In the routing table we only see the B-class network, the 192.168.0.0 /20 route. In my opinion, there should be both routes because there is no summarization cause we have 2 different gateways. The routes will be redistributed into 2 EIGRP processes, but this should not be the problem.
Does anybody ever had this problem or do you see any misconfiguration?
Thanks a lot in advance.
Don't have 3750's to test with but using 3700 routers in dynamips i replicated what you have and it works as expected ie. both routes in routing table.
Obviously your setup is probably a lot more complicated. The EIGRP processes - are you peering with the 2 routers in your diagram with these EIGRP processes ?