On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Devon True wrote:
So it is for the situation where you do not have a full table (so strict
and/or loose mode would not work), but you want uRPF on the edge to be
able to drop packets whose network is routed to null on your FIB?
To be able to accept and forward (not drop) p
Hi Devon -
With loose mode uRPF ("reachable-via any"), "allow-default" does mean
that any packet will pass the uRPF check (unless the default route goes away).
However, with strict mode uRPF ("reachable-via rx") with
allow-default, traffic not matching a more specific prefix only
passes the R
On 1/29/2010 4:57 PM, Antonio Querubin wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Antonio Querubin wrote:
>
>> Yes but that's not the interface where you would apply it. You apply
> ^
>necessarilly
>> 'allow-default' on your upstream interface that you point your default
>>
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Antonio Querubin wrote:
Yes but that's not the interface where you would apply it. You apply
^
necessarilly
'allow-default' on your upstream interface that you point your default route
to. Ie. if you set your default-route at a particul
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Devon True wrote:
I am curious what the purpose of uRPF's "allow-default" option is? Based
on Cisco's page explaining the command, I interpret that it allows uRPF
to match on a default route... but doesn't that defeat the purpose of uRPF?
See below.
interface Vlan100
ip
All:
I am curious what the purpose of uRPF's "allow-default" option is? Based
on Cisco's page explaining the command, I interpret that it allows uRPF
to match on a default route... but doesn't that defeat the purpose of uRPF?
My best guess is that it allows you to set static routes for networks
w
