Networking-Forums.com

Professional Discussions => Routing and Switching => Topic started by: deanwebb on June 05, 2017, 10:09:24 AM

Title: Static Route Courtesy
Post by: deanwebb on June 05, 2017, 10:09:24 AM
Just had this come up in a meeting and it sounds very reasonable.

When entering a static route, use the "name" function, if available, to comment what the route is for. This can be very helpful when troubleshooting L3 issues and in understanding connectivity patterns.

Too bad ASA firewalls can't do that, but at least our core and distro switches can do it.
Title: Re: Static Route Courtesy
Post by: icecream-guy on June 05, 2017, 10:37:23 AM
Quote from: deanwebb on June 05, 2017, 10:09:24 AM
Just had this come up in a meeting and it sounds very reasonable.

When entering a static route, use the "name" function, if available, to comment what the route is for. This can be very helpful when troubleshooting L3 issues and in understanding connectivity patterns.

Too bad ASA firewalls can't do that, but at least our core and distro switches can do it.
:zomgwtfbbq:

on the ASA
access-list OUTSIDE_IN remark *****************************************************
Title: Re: Static Route Courtesy
Post by: deanwebb on June 05, 2017, 11:44:24 AM
Quote from: ristau5741 on June 05, 2017, 10:37:23 AM
Quote from: deanwebb on June 05, 2017, 10:09:24 AM
Just had this come up in a meeting and it sounds very reasonable.

When entering a static route, use the "name" function, if available, to comment what the route is for. This can be very helpful when troubleshooting L3 issues and in understanding connectivity patterns.

Too bad ASA firewalls can't do that, but at least our core and distro switches can do it.
:zomgwtfbbq:

on the ASA
access-list OUTSIDE_IN remark *****************************************************

:doh:

I was looking for the "name" command in the syntax! :lol:
Title: Re: Static Route Courtesy
Post by: SimonV on June 05, 2017, 01:01:34 PM
My ex colleague introduced this to our configuration guidelines and I must admit it's pretty damn handy.  But for some reason I seem to remember from some syntax guide that it was intended to specify the name of the next-hop. Could be remembering it wrong though.
Title: Re: Static Route Courtesy
Post by: SofaKing on June 05, 2017, 02:49:15 PM
We started doing this on our retail routers.  Oddly enough the command does not work when adding static routes for DHCP.  No problem with static or PPPoE routes.  I agree that it is helpful.
Title: Re: Static Route Courtesy
Post by: Dieselboy on June 05, 2017, 11:55:40 PM
Definitely helps track static routes! Especially at a time when you're debugging and you go "WTF is that in there"... and then you read "... name Static route for XXX" - and then you just know.  :smug: