Static routing algorithms are actually table mappings established by the network administrator. These mappings do not change unless the network administrator alters them. Algorithms that use static routes are simple to design and work well in environments where network traffic is relatively predictable and where network design is relatively simple.

Because static routing systems cannot react to network changes, they generally are considered unsuitable for large, constantly changing networks. Most of the dominant routing algorithms are dynamic routing algorithms, which adjust to changing network circumstances by analyzing incoming routing update messages. If the message indicates that a network change has occurred, the routing software recalculates routes and sends out new routing update messages. These messages permeate the network, stimulating routers to rerun their algorithms and change their routing tables accordingly.

Dynamic routing algorithms can be supplemented with static routes where appropriate. A router of last resort (a default route for a router to which all unroutable packets are sent), for example, can be designated to act as a repository for all unroutable packets, ensuring that all messages are at least handled in some way.

Some sophisticated routing protocols support multiple paths to the same destination. Unlike single-path algorithms, these multipath algorithms permit traffic multiplexing over multiple lines. The advantages of multipath algorithms are substantially better throughput and reliability, which is generally called load sharing.

Some routing algorithms operate in a flat space, while others use routing hierarchies. In a flat routing system, the routers are peers of all others. In a hierarchical routing system, some routers form what amounts to a routing backbone. Packets from non-backbone routers travel to the backbone routers, where they are sent through the backbone until they reach the general area of the destination. At this point, they travel from the last backbone router through one or more non-backbone routers to the final destination.

Routing systems often designate logical groups of nodes, called domains, autonomous systems, or areas. In hierarchical systems, some routers in a domain can communicate with routers in other domains, while others can communicate only with routers within their domain. In very large networks, additional hierarchical levels may exist, with routers at the highest hierarchical level forming the routing backbone.

The primary advantage of hierarchical routing is that it mimics the organization of most companies and therefore supports their traffic patterns well. Most network communication occurs within small company groups (domains). Because intradomain routers need to know only about other routers within their domain, their routing algorithms can be simplified, and, depending on the routing algorithm being used, routing update traffic can be reduced accordingly.

Link-state algorithms (also known as shortest path first algorithms) flood routing information to all nodes in the internetwork. Each router, however, sends only the portion of the routing table that describes the state of its own links. In link-state algorithms, each router builds a picture of the entire network in its routing tables. Distance vector algorithms (also known as Bellman-Ford algorithms) call for each router to send all or some portion of its routing table, but only to its neighbors. In essence, link-state algorithms send small updates everywhere, while distance vector algorithms send larger updates only to neighboring routers. Distance vector algorithms know only about their neighbors. Typically, link-state algorithms are used in conjunction with OSPF routing protocols.

The ASA routing table can be populated by statically defined routes, directly connected routes, and routes discovered by the dynamic routing protocols. Because the ASA can run multiple routing protocols in addition to having static and connected routes in the routing table, it is possible that the same route is discovered or entered in more than one manner. When two routes to the same destination are put into the routing table, the one that remains in the routing table is determined as follows:

• If the two routes have different network prefix lengths (network masks), then both routes are considered unique and are entered into the routing table. The packet forwarding logic then determines which of the two to use.

  For example, if the RIP and OSPF processes discovered the following routes:

  • RIP: 192.168.32.0/24

  • OSPF: 192.168.32.0/19

  Even though OSPF routes have the better administrative distance, both routes are installed in the routing table because each of these routes has a different prefix length (subnet mask). They are considered different destinations and the packet forwarding logic determines which route to use.

• If the ASA learns about multiple paths to the same destination from a single routing protocol, such as RIP, the route with the better metric (as determined by the routing protocol) is entered into the routing table.

  Metrics are values associated with specific routes, ranking them from most preferred to least preferred. The parameters used to determine the metrics differ for different routing protocols. The path with the lowest metric is selected as the optimal path and installed in the routing table. If there are multiple paths to the same destination with equal metrics, load balancing is done on these equal cost paths.

• If the ASA learns about a destination from more than one routing protocol, the administrative distances of the routes are compared, and the routes with lower administrative distance are entered into the routing table.

Forwarding decisions are made as follows:

• If the destination does not match an entry in the routing table, the packet is forwarded through the interface specified for the default route. If a default route has not been configured, the packet is discarded.

• If the destination matches a single entry in the routing table, the packet is forwarded through the interface associated with that route.

• If the destination matches more than one entry in the routing table, then the packet is forwarded out of the interface associated with the route that has the longer network prefix length.

For example, a packet destined for 192.168.32.1 arrives on an interface with the following routes in the routing table:

• 192.168.32.0/24 gateway 10.1.1.2

• 192.168.32.0/19 gateway 10.1.1.3

In this case, a packet destined to 192.168.32.1 is directed toward 10.1.1.2, because 192.168.32.1 falls within the 192.168.32.0/24 network. It also falls within the other route in the routing table, but 192.168.32.0/24 has the longest prefix within the routing table (24 bits verses 19 bits). Longer prefixes are always preferred over shorter ones when forwarding a packet.

Note	Existing connections continue to use their established interfaces even if a new similar connection would result in different behavior due to a change in routes.

Dynamic routes are synchronized on the standby unit when the routing table changes on the active unit. This means that all additions, deletions, or changes on the active unit are immediately propagated to the standby unit. If the standby unit becomes active in an active/standby ready Failover pair, it will already have an identical routing table as that of the former active unit because routes are synchronized as a part of the Failover bulk synchronization and continuous replication processes.

This section describes how to use dynamic routing with clustering.

In multiple context mode, each context maintains a separate routing table and routing protocol databases. This enables you to configure OSPFv2 and EIGRP independently in each context. You can configure EIGRP in some contexts and OSPFv2 in the same or different contexts. In mixed context mode, you can enable any of the dynamic routing protocols in contexts that are in routed mode. RIP and OSPFv3 are not supported in multiple context mode.

The following table lists the attributes for EIGRP, OSPFv2, route maps used for distributing routes into OSPFv2 and EIGRP processes, and prefix lists used in OSPFv2 to filter the routing updates entering or leaving an area when they are used in multiple context mode:

An interface configured with management-only is considered a management interface.

In the following configuration, both the interfaces GigabitEthernet0/0 and Management0/0 are considered as management interfaces.

a/admin(config-if)# show running-config int g0/0
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
 management-only
 nameif inside
 security-level 100
 ip address 10.10.10.123 255.255.255.0
 ipv6 address 123::123/64
a/admin(config-if)# show running-config int m0/0
!
interface Management0/0
 management-only
 nameif mgmt
 security-level 0
 ip address 10.106.167.118 255.255.255.0
a/admin(config-if)#