Static Route Redundancy issues

[telesymbol]

Dear All,

our three routers are connected each other as per attached diagram, Router R1 is configured with two destinations through R2 & R3 as below

ip route 172.16.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.2
ip route 172.16.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.3
ip route 172.16.80.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.2
ip route 172.16.80.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.3

Destinations are reachable as long as R2 is available. The moment R2 is down, R1 does not send traffics to R3. please advice on the issue.

Regards

[Kasun Bandara]

did you checked these routes properly? i see subnets are not as usual for last 3 routes?

ip route 172.16.10.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.1.2
ip route 172.16.10.0 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.3
ip route 172.16.80.0 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.2
ip route 172.16.80.0 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.3

[telesymbol]

It was typo error and corrected them, thanks

[NetworkDave]

telesymbol,

How does R3 reach the destination networks; Directly connected Links or Static route?
If feasible, the routing tables for all three routers would be helpful.
Is this a lab or production network?

[telesymbol]

Both R2 & R3 are connected to core switch with OSPF routing & learn destination networks through OSPF from core switch

on R1 routing table looks as below

S 172.16.10.0/24 [1/0] via 192.168.1.3
                              [1/0] via 192.168.1.2

S 172.16.80.0/24 [1/0] via 192.168.1.3
                              [1/0] via 192.168.1.2

And its a production network.

All 3 routers are connected through a layer 2 switch ports all in the same VLAN

[MHM Cisco World]

check 
show ip in brief in each router are interface is UP/UP 
show ip route in each router are the subnet mask for connect is /29 ??

[telesymbol]

Apologies for the late response.

All interconnected interfaces are UP

From the show ip route, all destinations are on the routing table via 192.168.2 & 192.168.3.

One thing we've noted is that when we delete the static route that goes through R2, R1 uses R3 for its destinations without any issue. If we did not delete a static route that goes through R2 and R2 is down, R1 is not sending traffics through R3 properly. some traffics goes through R3 & the rest not.

[MHM Cisco World]

Hi friend thanks for more info. 
we go deep but the solution is in front our eyes 
the idea of using track with static route is this case ???
Yes 
the track with static route is design to detect un-direct connect next-hop down, 
here next-hop is connect to SW then SW connect to our router, 
even if next-hop is down SW-our Router is always UP 
and hence out Router (R1) can not detect R2 down. 
simple solution add track to static route to detect far next-hop and remove static route dynamic when track down.

[NetworkDave]

telesymbol,

Why isn't OSPF being used for the affected routes?

If the preference is to use static routes, then please follow the suggestion provided by @MHM Cisco World

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Remember to mark helpful posts and mark the correct answer as a solution; It helps other users with similar questions.