The suggested static route is somewhat problematic. It MIGHT work but it might not work. And even if it works there are some issues with it.
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 gigabitEthernet 0/0
The problems involve static routes that just point to the outbound interface where the outbound interface is Ethernet (or various flovors of Ethernet such as GigEthernet).
The effect of this configuration is that the router must ARP for every destination to which it will forward packets and that brings up several problems:
- for this to work at all requires that the next hop router must have enabled proxy arp. And increasingly organizations are disabling proxy arp believing that it is a security weakness. So the chances are increasing that this will just not work.
- even if it does work there are several other aspects that are not desirable
- the router must ARP for every destination and this will result in increased CPU load from processing all the ARP request and ARP response messages.
- the router must maintain the ARP table based on the responses and so there will be increased load on the CPU from the effort to maintain the ARP table.
- it will increase memory utilization since the ARP table will now contain an ARP entry for each remote destination for which the router has forwarded traffic and that potentially is a lot of ARP entries.
It is much better practice to specify the next hop address when configuring a static route that will go out an Ethernet interface.
HTH
Rick
HTH
Rick
