From: tv (tvarriale@xxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Jan 18 2001 - 01:44:45 GMT-3
EEK! I am sorry for that......I mis-read the post. I thought there were 2
clusters. Yes, the cluster ids should be the same within a group of RRs
that are providing redundancy to prevent routing loops. Going to bed now :)
tv
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Stover" <mstover@cisco.com>
To: "'tv'" <tvarriale@telocity.com>; "'Daniel M. Dawson'"
<dandawson@lucent.com>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 10:33 PM
Subject: RE: BGP Clusters with Multiple Route Reflectors
> No, All route-reflectors in a cluster (being used for redundancy) must
have the same cluster-id, otherwise it is possible to get routing loops.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > tv
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 11:21 PM
> > To: Daniel M. Dawson
> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: BGP Clusters with Multiple Route Reflectors
> >
> >
> > The bgp cluster-ids MUST be different and only goes on the
> > RRs..NOT the
> > clients.
> >
> > tv
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Daniel M. Dawson" <dandawson@lucent.com>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2001 7:10 PM
> > Subject: BGP Clusters with Multiple Route Reflectors
> >
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > A question about multiple route reflectors within a
> > cluster. (I've set
> > this
> > > up based on Lab 5s layout). In this particular case I have
> > R4 and R5 as
> > the
> > > route reflectors and R3 and R6 as the route reflector
> > clients. These
> > route
> > > reflecotr clients are configured with neighbor statements
> > to each route
> > > reflector for redundancy. When I set up the
> > route-reflectors only (no the
> > > clients) with the cluster ID the clients get double listings for all
> > > networks in their BGP table. The reflectors have only the
> > single entry
> > for
> > > each entry. As shown below:
> > >
> > >
> > > R5# "SHOW IP BGP" output (Route-reflector)
> > > BGP table version is 5, local router ID is 172.168.200.1
> > > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, >
> > best, i -
> > > internal
> > > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
> > >
> > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
> > > *>i20.0.0.0 172.168.100.3 0 100 0 ?
> > > *> 71.0.0.0 137.20.20.1 0 2 3 i
> > > *>i172.168.40.0/24 172.168.200.2 0 100 0 i
> > > *>i172.168.60.0/24 172.168.100.6 0 100 0 i
> > >
> > > R6# "SHOW IP BGP" output (Route-reflector-client)
> > > BGP table version is 17, local router ID is 172.168.100.6
> > > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, >
> > best, i -
> > > internal
> > > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
> > >
> > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
> > > *>i20.0.0.0 172.168.100.3 0 100 0 ?
> > > * i 172.168.100.3 0
> > 100 0 ?
> > > * i71.0.0.0 137.20.20.1 100
> > 0 2 3 i
> > > *>i 137.20.20.1
> > 100 0 2 3 i
> > > *>i172.168.40.0/24 172.168.200.2 0 100 0 i
> > > * i 172.168.200.2 0
> > 100 0 i
> > > *> 172.168.60.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> > >
> > >
> > > If instead I put the Cluster Id on the on the clients as
> > well, the clients
> > > have only the one entry for each network int the table.
> > However a strange
> > > thing occurs. Any routes coming from another client within
> > the cluster
> > does
> > > not get put into the table of the other clients. The route
> > reflectors
> > > themselves do have the route in their BGP table and are
> > advertizing it to
> > > the clients. Show BGP table after putting clusterIDs on
> > the clients shown
> > > below:
> > >
> > >
> > > R5# "SHOW IP BGP" output (Route-reflector)
> > > BGP table version is 11, local router ID is 172.168.200.1
> > > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, >
> > best, i -
> > > internal
> > > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
> > >
> > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
> > > *>i20.0.0.0 172.168.100.3 0 100 0 ?
> > > *> 71.0.0.0 137.20.20.1 0 2 3 i
> > > *>i172.168.40.0/24 172.168.200.2 0 100 0 i
> > > *>i172.168.60.0/24 172.168.100.6 0 100 0 i
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > R6# "SHOW IP BGP" output (Route-reflector-client)
> > > BGP table version is 4, local router ID is 172.168.100.6
> > > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, >
> > best, i -
> > > internal
> > > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
> > >
> > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
> > > *>i71.0.0.0 137.20.20.1 100 0 2 3 i
> > > *>i172.168.40.0/24 172.168.200.2 0 100 0 i
> > > *> 172.168.60.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > So the question is should I be using Cluster-ID on the
> > > route-reflector-clients and if so, how do I get the client
> > to see routes
> > > originated on other clients. If I shouldn't be using
> > cluster-ID on the
> > > clients, are the double routes supposed to be there?
> > Thanks for any help.
> > >
> > >
> > > Configs:
> > >
> > > WITH CLUSTER ID ON THE ROUTE-REFLECTOR-CLIENT
> > >
> > > R4 (RR)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > bgp cluster-id 10
> > > network 172.168.40.0 mask 255.255.255.0
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 route-reflector-client
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 route-reflector-client
> > >
> > > R3 (RRC)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > redistribute static
> > > bgp cluster-id 10
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > >
> > >
> > > R5 (RR)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > bgp cluster-id 10
> > > neighbor 137.20.20.1 remote-as 2
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 route-reflector-client
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 route-reflector-client
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 remote-as 1
> > >
> > >
> > > R6 (RRC)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > bgp cluster-id 10
> > > network 172.168.60.0 mask 255.255.255.0
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > >
> > >
> > > WITHOUT CLUSTER ID ON THE ROUTE-REFLECTOR-CLIENT
> > >
> > > R4 (RR)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > bgp cluster-id 10
> > > network 172.168.40.0 mask 255.255.255.0
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 route-reflector-client
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 route-reflector-client
> > >
> > > R3 (RRC)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > redistribute static
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > >
> > >
> > > R5 (RR)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > bgp cluster-id 10
> > > neighbor 137.20.20.1 remote-as 2
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.3 route-reflector-client
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.6 route-reflector-client
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 remote-as 1
> > >
> > >
> > > R6 (RRC)
> > > router bgp 1
> > > no synchronization
> > > network 172.168.60.0 mask 255.255.255.0
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.100.5 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 remote-as 1
> > > neighbor 172.168.200.2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Daniel M. Dawson
> > > Network Systems Consultant
> > > Network Care Professional Services (NPS)
> > > Lucent Technologies
> > > Mobile: (405) 850-1493
> > > Pager: (800) 622-9202
> > > E-mail: dandawson@lucent.com
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:33 GMT-3