From: Wayne Hu (wayneccie@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Nov 11 2000 - 02:37:30 GMT-3
Hi, Jack
The problem is when you redistribute the connected 10.6.1.0 to OSPF, on R1
you can't see that route 10.6.1.0 showing as OSPF
route because it's direct connected.
On R2 you can see route 10.6.1.0 as ospf external route, you can
redistribute to BGP from here.
Correct me if I am wrong
wayne
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Jack Heney
Sent: November 10, 2000 4:18 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: connected->ospf->bgp
10.6.2.0/24 10.6.1.0/24
R2--------------R1--------------
R1:
interface fastethernet 0/0
ip address 10.6.1.1 255.255.255.0
interface fastethernet 0/1
ip address 10.6.2.1 255.255.255.0
access-list 1 permit 10.6.1.0 0.0.0.255
route-map cisco permit 10
match ip address 1
router ospf 1
network 10.6.2.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
redistribute connected subnets route-map cisco
router bgp 1
no auto-summary
neighbor 10.6.2.2 remote-as 1
redistribute ospf 1 match internal external 1 external 2
R2:
interface fastethernet 0/0
ip address 10.6.2.2 255.255.255.0
router ospf 1
network 10.6.2.0 0.0.0.255 area 0
router bgp 1
neighbor 10.6.2.1 remote-as 1
My question is this - Why does network 10.6.1.0/24 not show up in BGP?
Redistributing connected with the route-map on R1 adds an external type 2
entry to the OSPF database, and then BGP is configured to redistribute all
OSPF information (internal and external 1/2). The only way to get the
10.6.1.0/24 network into BGP (without a network command on R1) is to
redistribute OSPF into BGP on R2...Why can R2 perform this redsitribution,
but R1 cannot?
Thanks,
Jack
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:44 GMT-3