On Tue, 17 Sep 1996 cor@xs4all.net wrote:
> We have almost the exact same setup. But we use RIP to give the routes
> to the cisco. On the cisco we have a route for the Class C net
> assigned to the portmasters behind this cisco. Something like..
>
> ip route 194.109.100.0 0.0.0.255 null0
>
> This means, that when a certain user is no longer there, the RIPped
> route will disappear, and the cisco will see the above route matching
> before the default route. The above route basically dumps the packet
> into /dev/null. And it also generates a host unreachable.
> I would say that is the correct way to do this.
>
Well, yes, but that chews up an entire class C network for the user
addresses. We were trying to avoid that but I do see the advantage.
Chuck