Sounds like more of an interface issue than a performance one. One of the developers at Cisco (or more likely some company that Cisco bought) figured that a "sh ip route x.x.x.x" comand should not take into account a default route, so the user is not potentially confused, thinking there is a specific route to that address. Then another developer added the longer-prefixes arguement and thought that the default route should be taken into account. Just accept it and move on.
Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=34917&t=34834 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
