You didn't have to point it to the Loopback and please stop calling it FA :-)). FA is OSPF *only* concept. It's called next-hop in this sense. There are subtle, but fundamental differences.
When you create a static route, you need to point it to *some* next-hop. In this case, Loopback interface was chosen, which I think is not the best choice. As I wrote in my earlier message, the usual approach is to point it to Null0. You need that next-hop because the syntax for static routes requires it. It really won't be used for anything (good). -- Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S) Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 09:00, Vijaya Laxmi <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2/22/2012 7:55 AM, Marko Milivojevic wrote: >> >> ip route 150.1.66.0 255.255.255.0 loopback0*6.6.6.254 tag 10* track 1 >> >>> > > I am struggling with static route in the sense :- > > Why do I need to point it out Loopback0 ? but in reality they used FA of > 6.6.6.254 which is in same subnet as the new loopback50 that was created, > which uses time based ACL !! I did not get the concept used in this > configuration really .. > > >>>> int lo50 >>>> ip add 6.6.6.6 255.255.255.255 >>>> ip access-group TEST_ACL in >>>> > > > ip route 150.1.66.0 255.255.255.0 loopback0 6.6.6.254 tag 10 track 1 > > > Oops I will reply-all ;).. new user issues... > > Thank you > VL > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out www.PlatinumPlacement.com http://onlinestudylist.com/mailman/listinfo/ccie_rs
