RE: policy route [7:21044]

2001-09-27 Thread Stephen Skinner
my appologies. i always presumed it worked in the same way as unix-HA... thanks for the correction steve From: Kent Hundley Reply-To: Kent Hundley To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: policy route [7:21044] Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:52:32 -0400 Stephen, Your statement is incorrect

RE: policy route [7:21044]

2001-09-26 Thread Stephen Skinner
`m told ther is a way around this but you will have to search the archives...it was only a couple of weeks ago Cheers steve From: Jim Bond Reply-To: Jim Bond To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: policy route [7:21044] Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 17:15:07 -0400 I have to disagree. The standby router

RE: policy route [7:21044]

2001-09-26 Thread Kent Hundley
and just re-confirmed it in my lab. -Kent -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stephen Skinner Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 8:12 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: policy route [7:21044] i have to diasgreeevery 3 secs a pulse is sent

RE: policy route [7:21044]

2001-09-25 Thread Liang Mark J Civ AFRL/PROI
Standby is stanby, it doesn't do any routing until the active router goes down. Regards, Mark, -Original Message- From: Jim Bond [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2001 11:52 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: policy route [7:21044] Hello, I have 2 routers

RE: policy route [7:21044]

2001-09-25 Thread Jim Bond
I have to disagree. The standby router has static route point to the other side. Once traffic gets to standby, it should route... Jim --- Liang Mark J Civ AFRL/PROI wrote: Standby is stanby, it doesn't do any routing until the active router goes down. Regards, Mark, -Original