I have a Nexus 7k with a load balancer connected on trunks. The trunk to the outside port of the lb carries vlan 223 and the inside carries vlan 224. The Nexus has layer 3 SVI's for both vlan223 and vlan224. The lb has IP's for both vlans also. interface Vlan223   ip address 10.1.223.3/24   hsrp 223     ip 10.1.223.1 interface Vlan224   ip address 10.1.224.5/24   hsrp 224     ip 10.1.224.1 My coworker put a static route in the Nexus 7k for the vlan224 subnet to go to the IP address on the load balancer: ip route 10.1.224.0/24 10.1.223.254 And now the route table shows the static route is installed instead of the connected interface. 10.1.224.0/24, ubest/mbest: 1/0     *via 10.1.223.254, [1/0], 21w0d, static How is this possible? Why is the static route installed in the route table when a connected interface is present? I'm asking because I have to recreate this at a disaster recovery location that uses a 6509 instead of a Nexus 7k, and when I add a static route to the 6509, it doesn't get added to the route table--just the connected interface does. Any help is greatly appreciated! ... View more

A customer network had a 2620 router trunked to a 2950 switch with some hosts in vlan 2 and some with no access port assignment. Hosts on the native vlan were able to access (per user reports) a server on vlan 2 until we replaced the 2620 with a 3750 mls. I put the untagged ports in vlan 3, setup SVIs for vlan 2 and 3, and trunked to the 2950. The subnets were consecutive /27 that could form a /26. During troubleshooting, I found the customer gave the vlan 2 server the /26 mask. The server could talk to other vlan 2 hosts, ping its SVI gateway, Internet hosts, but not the vlan 3 SVI or hosts. Vlan 3 hosts could ping any vlan 2 host except the server. Once the mask on the vlan 2 server was corrected, all worked as expected. Thoughts? How did the mask affect intervlan routing on a mls but not a router? ... View more