Support Forum
The Forums are a place to find answers on a range of Fortinet products from peers and product experts.
Konnan
New Contributor III

Understanding better set update-static-route enable/disable command for link-monitor

Hello everyone,

 

I'd like to better understand the "set update-static-route" command and the effects of "enable" and "disable" settings.

I read several articles but I want to make sure what I'm doing because I'm setting up a firewall remotely on a remote site where it's difficult to dispatch so I'd like to avoid making stupid mistakes.

 

We have two WAN links, ext1 is fiber and ext2 is cellular, so ext1 needs to be primary and ext2 secondary. We are not looking at improving performance, we just want extra reliability so everything fails over automatically to ext2 if ext1 fails, and also it fails back automatically to ext1 when it comes back.

 

There's a passage in this article that annoys me : Link-Monitor Explained - Fortinet Community

 

**set update-static-route Enable/disable updating the static route, default: enable”
[** It is advised to keep disabled as it may cause the production environment down , Make sure it's working before enabling it]

 

I think I need to at least put "set update-static-route enable" in ext1 link-monitor configuration so it removes the route from the route table when ext1 fails so ext2 can take over. No need to put it in ext2 because ext1 is primary so it can stay in the route table even if failed. After reading that article, I'm not sure anymore, I do not want to bring the production environment down.

 

Also the part where it removes the route when link-monitor fails, the failover part, is kinda explained, but when let say ext1 comes back online, how does it work, that part is not explained much, the fallback, I'd like to know technically how it works if possible.

 

I want to make sure it falls back automatically because the ext2 is 16 Mbits and ext1 is 100 Mbits, so significant performance drop to stay on ext2. Good for backup purposes but we want to avoid it at all costs.

 

You can see my current configuration below:

 

FW-1 # show system link-monitor

 

config system link-monitor
edit "1"
set srcintf "ext1"
set server "8.8.8.8" "8.8.4.4" "1.1.1.1" "1.0.0.1"
set gateway-ip 000.111.222.333
set update-cascade-interface disable
set update-static-route disable
next
edit "2"
set srcintf "ext2"
set server "8.8.8.8" "8.8.4.4" "1.1.1.1" "1.0.0.1"
set gateway-ip 444.555.666.777
set update-cascade-interface disable
set update-static-route disable
next
end

 

FW-1 # get router info routing-table static

 

Routing table for VRF=0
S* 0.0.0.0/0 [10/0] via 000.111.222.333, ext1, [1/0]
. . . . . . . . . . [10/0] via 444.555.666.777, ext2, [100/0]
*omitting the other static routes for a shorter post*

 

FW-1 # diagnose sys link-monitor status

 

Link Monitor: 1, Status: alive, Server num(4), cfg_version=0 HA state: local(alive), shared(alive)
Flags=0x1 init, Create time: Thu Jun 19 13:57:55 2025
Source interface: ext1 (5)
VRF: 0
Gateway: 000.111.222.333
Interval: 500 ms
Service-detect: disable
Diffservcode: 000000
Class-ID: 0
Transport-Group: 0
Class-ID: 0
Peer: 8.8.8.8(8.8.8.8)
Source IP(000.111.222.334)
Route: 000.111.222.334->8.8.8.8/32, gwy(000.111.222.333)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 23.491/23.795/23.626 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.004/0.211/0.064 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.392
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 2012288, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746
Peer: 8.8.4.4(8.8.4.4)
Source IP(000.111.222.334)
Route: 000.111.222.334->8.8.4.4/32, gwy(000.111.222.333)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 20.367/20.781/20.476 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.009/0.275/0.064 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.394
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 2012347, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746
Peer: 1.1.1.1(1.1.1.1)
Source IP(000.111.222.334)
Route: 000.111.222.334->1.1.1.1/32, gwy(000.111.222.333)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 17.089/17.385/17.236 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.007/0.201/0.083 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.396
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 2012792, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746
Peer: 1.0.0.1(1.0.0.1)
Source IP(000.111.222.334)
Route: 000.111.222.334->1.0.0.1/32, gwy(000.111.222.333)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 17.052/17.362/17.233 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.002/0.166/0.060 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.396
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 2012776, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746

 

Link Monitor: 2, Status: alive, Server num(4), cfg_version=0 HA state: local(alive), shared(alive)
Flags=0x1 init, Create time: Thu Jun 19 13:57:55 2025
Source interface: ext2 (40)
VRF: 0
Gateway: 444.555.666.777
Interval: 500 ms
Service-detect: disable
Diffservcode: 000000
Class-ID: 0
Transport-Group: 0
Class-ID: 0
Peer: 8.8.8.8(8.8.8.8)
Source IP(444.555.666.778)
Route: 444.555.666.778->8.8.8.8/32, gwy(444.555.666.777)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 36.376/54.634/42.710 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.104/16.255/4.969 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.377
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 15205, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746
Peer: 8.8.4.4(8.8.4.4)
Source IP(444.555.666.778)
Route: 444.555.666.778->8.8.4.4/32, gwy(444.555.666.777)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 35.251/50.594/43.404 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.059/15.290/6.089 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.375
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 15205, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746
Peer: 1.1.1.1(1.1.1.1)
Source IP(444.555.666.778)
Route: 444.555.666.778->1.1.1.1/32, gwy(444.555.666.777)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 34.345/54.572/42.617 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.031/12.014/3.597 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.378
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 15207, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746
Peer: 1.0.0.1(1.0.0.1)
Source IP(444.555.666.778)
Route: 444.555.666.778->1.0.0.1/32, gwy(444.555.666.777)
protocol: ping, state: alive
Latency(Min/Max/Avg): 32.099/50.054/40.712 ms
Jitter(Min/Max/Avg): 0.027/15.144/5.599 ms
Packet lost: 0.000%
MOS: 4.377
Number of out-of-sequence packets: 0
Fail Times(0/5)
Packet sent: 2012824, received: 15207, Sequence(sent/rcvd/exp): 46745/46745/46746

 

Hoping everything is OK, if there's anything else, do not hesitate to ask.

 

Thanks!

 

Konnan

1 Solution
toshi-esumi
New Contributor III

my understanding is the same as yours. You can specify the routes you want remove after 7.0. The admin guides no longer shows "set update-static-route enable" any more since it's "default" setting.
https://docs.fortinet.com/document/fortigate/7.4.8/administration-guide/647723/link-monitor-with-rou...

And, that's the only thing it would do. So when those removed routes are restored, the traffic flows to that direction when link-monitor recovers.

Toshi

View solution in original post

4 REPLIES 4
toshi-esumi
New Contributor III

my understanding is the same as yours. You can specify the routes you want remove after 7.0. The admin guides no longer shows "set update-static-route enable" any more since it's "default" setting.
https://docs.fortinet.com/document/fortigate/7.4.8/administration-guide/647723/link-monitor-with-rou...

And, that's the only thing it would do. So when those removed routes are restored, the traffic flows to that direction when link-monitor recovers.

Toshi

Konnan
New Contributor III

Thanks for your followup! Much appreciated. It made me think a bit more and I think I'm more in peace with it now.

Konnan
New Contributor III

Finally you are the only one who answered hehe, thanks for your help again! Marked as an Answer.

toshi-esumi
New Contributor III

Thanks @Konnan 

Toshi

Announcements
Check out our Community Chatter Blog! Click here to get involved
Labels
Top Kudoed Authors