Yes it is a typo. Arg. I just couldn't see it! I had a intern doing a simple lab and came up wit this issue. I think that this is instructive though; seeing that a static route pointing to a destination not on an adjacent interface will not put anything in the route table. I guess that is a nice feature of IOS to keep from blackholing routes that might get learned some other way. Thanks Sundar.
Perhaps a bit of clarification is in order. You say: "a static route pointing to a destination not on an adjacent interface will not put anything in the route table". This is not quite the right understanding. It is not a question of adjacent interface, but is a question of whether the next hop is reachable. It is quite reasonable and functional to configure static routes with next hop addresses that are several hops away, as long as the next hop addressses are reachable. This is called a recursive lookup.
I recently had an experience that shows how and why someone might do this. There was a remote router which had a static default route configured using a next hop address which was a loopback interface on the enterprise border router which was several hops away. As long as the internal routing protocol was advertising the address of the border router, the remote router had a default route and would forward traffic. But if the border router did not appear to be reachable then the remote did not forward.
So in your situation if there had been something (another static route or a dynamic route) that made 126.96.36.199 seem reachable then the route would have been put into the routing table.
Rick is correct in that the next hop IP need not be a directly connected device. The reason I didn't get into all that is because it clearly looked like a case of typo.
In your case if you had a static route for 188.8.131.52 reachable via 192.168.0.98 the static route you originally had in there would have showed up in the routing table. The router would have performed recursive route lookup to forward the traffic. As Rick explained there are some valid reasons for using a next-hop that's not directly connected but your case doesn't look like it needs one though.
Question We run asr9001 with XR 6.1.3, and we have a very long delay to
login w/ SSH 1 or 2 to the device compare to IOS device. After
investigation, the there is 1s delay between the client KEXDH_INIT and
the server (XR) KEXDH_REPLY. After debug ssh serv...
Introduction The purpose of this document is to demonstrate the Open
Shortest Path First (OSPF) behavior when the V-bit (Virtual-link bit) is
present in a non-backbone area. The V-bit is signaled in Type-1 LSA only
if the router is the endpoint of one or ...
Hi, I am seeing quite a few issues with patch install and wanted to
share my experience and workaround to this. Login to admin via CLI, then
access root with the “shell” command Issue “df –h” and you’ll probably
see the following directory full or nearly ...