From: Gopal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sat Feb 10 2001 - 22:48:39 GMT-3
SHO IP BGP 1.1.1.0' WILL HELP.
Cheers,
Gopal
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Le <mmle@sprintparanet.com>
To: 'Devender Singh' <devender.singh@cmc.cwo.net.au>; 'Ccielab@Groupstudy.
Com (E-mail)' <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Date: Saturday, February 10, 2001 12:21 PM
Subject: RE: BGP LOCAL PREF: Explain me this.
>There are two reasons I can think of off hand.
>Since the IBGP route is the one constantly being overlooked, see if you
have
>syncrhonization turned on. If you do and the the path isn't in IGP, then
>it's not a valid path for selection.
>Also, is the next-hop ip reachable? If it's not, then it also isn't a valid
>path for selection.
>
>Michael Le, CCIE #6811
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
>Devender Singh
>Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2001 6:48 AM
>To: Ccielab@Groupstudy. Com (E-mail)
>Subject: BGP LOCAL PREF: Explain me this.
>
>
>I always thought local pref is number two high in bgp decision process
after
>weight.
>I am getting best path with local-pref of 50 instead of 200. It does not
>make much sense to me. Do you guys agree with me.
>
>r3#sh ip bgp
>BGP table version is 33, local router ID is 172.17.33.3
>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
>*> 0.0.0.0 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 i
>* i1.1.1.0/24 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400 i
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400 i
>* i2.1.1.0/24 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400 i
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400 i
>* i3.0.0.0 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400 i
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400 i
>* i192.168.16.0 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
300
>?
>* i192.168.17.0 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
300
>?
>* i192.168.18.0 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
300
>?
>* i192.168.19.0/28 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
>300 ?
>* i192.168.19.16/28 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
>300 ?
>* i192.168.19.32/28 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
>300 ?
>* i192.168.19.48/28 172.16.11.1 0 200 0 300 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 50 0 200 400
>300 ?
>* i200.1.3.0 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400 200 ?
>*> 172.17.34.4 0 50 0 200 ?
>* i201.0.1.0 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400 200
?
>*> 172.17.34.4 0 50 0 200 ?
>* i201.1.1.0 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400 200
>?
>*> 172.17.34.4 0 50 0 200 ?
>* i201.1.2.0 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400
200
>?
>*> 172.17.34.4 0 50 0 200 ?
>* i201.2.1.0 172.16.11.1 200 0 300 400
200
>?
>*> 172.17.34.4 0 50 0 200 ?
>r3#
>
>Devender Singh
>BE(Hons), CCNP
>IP Solution Specialist
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:45 GMT-3