From: Mohamed Heeba (MAHeeba@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed May 09 2001 - 17:19:08 GMT-3
i had this doubt from the begining that the confederation may create this
problem (logically it shouldn't in fact since it should be transparent )
btw , sometimes you are not allowed to use single way to do something ,so u
have to know how to make things by different ways :))
anyway thank u all for the help.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Chahal [SMTP:bob.chahal@ntlworld.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 12:47 PM
> To: Padhu (LFG); 'Mohamed Heeba'; 'Rob Hopkins'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: BGP maximum paths
>
> I've tried this and it appears that bgp maximum paths will not work within
> confederations. Use the same configurations but without the confereration
> config (i.e treat the two AS as true external peers) and BGP max-paths
> works
> a treat. As for load balancing. I don't know but I'd go with peering with
> loopbacks. As it is a confederation are you not running IGP(s) that will
> discover the routes to the loopbacks?
>
> Nice problem :-)
>
> Bob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Johnny Dedon" <johnny.dedon@exodus.net>
> To: "Padhu (LFG)" <padhu@steinroe.com>; "'Mohamed Heeba'"
> <MAHeeba@itqan.co.ae>; "'Rob Hopkins'" <rshopkins@earthlink.net>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 6:47 PM
> Subject: Re: BGP maximum paths
>
>
> > Mohamed,
> > This may not be the cause, and assuming that you have cleared bgp *,
> have
> > you tried clearing the local route cache? I really can't think of any
> > reason you shouldn't see both routes.
> > Johnny Dedon
> > Senior Staff Consultant
> > Exodus Professional Services
> > johnny.dedon@exodus.net
> > www.exodus.net
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Padhu (LFG)" <padhu@steinroe.com>
> > To: "'Mohamed Heeba'" <MAHeeba@itqan.co.ae>; "Padhu (LFG)"
> > <padhu@steinroe.com>; "'Rob Hopkins'" <rshopkins@earthlink.net>;
> > <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 12:29 PM
> > Subject: RE: BGP maximum paths
> >
> >
> > > Oops missed that EBGP routes ..Pls ignore my no synch...
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Mohamed Heeba [mailto:MAHeeba@itqan.co.ae]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 11:57 AM
> > > To: 'Padhu (LFG)'; 'Rob Hopkins'; Mohamed Heeba;
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: RE: BGP maximum paths
> > >
> > >
> > > genltemen ;
> > > i read most of the posts until now and i didnt find any convencing
> answer.
> > > the static routes config are not allowed unless specified .so i cannot
> > > configure static routes to point to both of the links otherwise it
> will
> be
> > > static routes load balancing.
> > > the other solution of config with loopbacks and multihop is ok ,but
> this
> > is
> > > another way to config the balance plus the the lab solutions is
> showing
> > the
> > > ser IP as the peer address .
> > > no synch is helpless here since the routes are learned externally ,no
> > synch
> > > will affect only when the routes are learnt internally to let them
> appear
> > in
> > > the route table and then propagated.
> > > the last answer was about the confederation ,R2 and R5 are in
> > confederation
> > > inside the AS 200 ,the AS 300 has nothin to do with that since
> > confederation
> > > should be transparen to it .
> > >
> > >
> > > as per halabi ,once you put the maximum path command ,any routes
> learnt
> > from
> > > two peers in the same AS and showing in the BGP table ,should appear
> in
> > the
> > > routing table as well...this doesnt happen with me .
> > > the two routes are in the BGP table and the prefered one is based on
> the
> > > lowest IP (this means they are identical in everything ) ,however they
> > dont
> > > show in the route table .......
> > >
> > >
> > > anything there i missed ?????
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Padhu (LFG) [SMTP:padhu@steinroe.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 9:15 AM
> > > > To: 'Rob Hopkins'; Mohamed Heeba; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: RE: BGP maximum paths
> > > >
> > > > Rob
> > > >
> > > > Since R2 and R5 are in confederation in As 200,wouldn't this be
> > > > transparent
> > > > to AS300 ? ..that is, all R1 knows about is AS200.... Would no sync
> help
> > > > here to install both routes in the IP table ?
> > > >
> > > > Cheers,Padhu
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Rob Hopkins [mailto:rshopkins@earthlink.net]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:54 AM
> > > > To: Mohamed Heeba; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > > Subject: Re: BGP maximum paths
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > with bgp max paths, both paths must be from the same AS
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Rob Hopkins
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 1.6180339887499
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Mohamed Heeba" <MAHeeba@itqan.co.ae>
> > > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 10:04 AM
> > > > Subject: BGP maximum paths
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > guys ,
> > > > > i have a router R1 in AS 300 ,connecting to another AS 200 thourgh
> two
> > > > > serial connection ,each one going to different routers R2 and R5
> (they
> > > > are
> > > > > in confederation in As 200)
> > > > > the requirement is to load balance the traffic across both of the
> > links.
> > > > > i have enabled the maximum paths 2 command on the BGP .
> > > > > but still the routes didnt appear in the routing table .
> > > > > they are on the bgp table ,showing two paths ,the prefered one is
> even
> > > > the
> > > > > one with the lowest ip address .
> > > > >
> > > > > R1 is running 11.1 , do i need to enable anything else to get the
> > routes
> > > > in
> > > > > the ip route table ???
> > > > > here is R1 configs
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > interface Loopback0
> > > > > ip address 206.11.5.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> > > > > ip address 206.11.6.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> > > > > ip address 206.11.7.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> > > > > ip address 206.11.4.1 255.255.255.0
> > > > > no ip mroute-cache
> > > > > no ip route-cache
> > > > > !
> > > > > interface Serial0
> > > > > ip address 206.11.20.18 255.255.255.248
> > > > > no ip mroute-cache
> > > > > no ip route-cache
> > > > > bandwidth 64
> > > > > !
> > > > > interface Serial1
> > > > > ip address 206.11.20.66 255.255.255.248
> > > > > no ip mroute-cache
> > > > > no ip route-cache
> > > > > bandwidth 64
> > > > > !
> > > > > router bgp 300
> > > > > network 206.11.4.0
> > > > > network 206.11.5.0
> > > > > network 206.11.6.0
> > > > > network 206.11.7.0
> > > > > neighbor 206.11.20.17 remote-as 200
> > > > > neighbor 206.11.20.65 remote-as 200
> > > > > maximum-paths 2
> > > > > no auto-summary
> > > > > !
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > r2501#sh ip bgp
> > > > > BGP table version is 19, local router ID is 206.11.4.1
> > > > > 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
> > > > > * 10.0.0.2/32 206.11.20.65 0 200 i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 0 200 i
> > > > > * 10.0.0.4/32 206.11.20.65 0 200 i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 200 i
> > > > > * 10.0.0.5/32 206.11.20.65 0 0 200 i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 200 i
> > > > > * 10.1.1.0/24 206.11.20.65 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > * 20.1.1.0/24 206.11.20.65 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > * 22.1.1.0/24 206.11.20.65 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > * 24.1.1.0/24 206.11.20.65 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > *> 206.11.20.17 0 200 100
> i
> > > > > *> 206.11.4.0 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> > > > > *> 206.11.5.0 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> > > > > *> 206.11.6.0 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> > > > > *> 206.11.7.0 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> > > > > r2501#
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > r2501#sh ip route
> > > > > Codes: C - connected, S - static, I - IGRP, R - RIP, M - mobile, B
> -
> > BGP
> > > > > D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter
> area
> > > > > D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter
> area
> > > > > i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, * -
> > candidate
> > > > > default
> > > > > U - per-user static route
> > > > >
> > > > > Gateway of last resort is not set
> > > > >
> > > > > 10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
> > > > > B 10.0.0.2/32 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:16
> > > > > B 10.1.1.0/24 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:16
> > > > > B 10.0.0.4/32 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:17
> > > > > B 10.0.0.5/32 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:17
> > > > > 20.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > > > > B 20.1.1.0 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:17
> > > > > 22.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > > > > B 22.1.1.0 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:17
> > > > > 24.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 1 subnets
> > > > > B 24.1.1.0 [20/0] via 206.11.20.17, 00:14:17
> > > > > C 206.11.5.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > > > > C 206.11.4.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > > > > C 206.11.7.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > > > > C 206.11.6.0/24 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > > > > 206.11.20.0/29 is subnetted, 2 subnets
> > > > > C 206.11.20.64 is directly connected, Serial1
> > > > > C 206.11.20.16 is directly connected, Serial0
> > > > > r2501#
> > > > > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> > > > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> > > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> > > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
> > **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:30:37 GMT-3