From: Xuan.Sun@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue Aug 28 2001 - 00:28:58 GMT-3
Hi All
I found out the problem. It was caused by the IOS. The two 3810 routers I
used runs 12.0.7T.
After upgrading the IOS to 12.1.9. Everything is fine.
Hopfully, we do not run into such trouble in the lab.
Thank everyone for your input.
---------------------- Forwarded by Xuan Sun on 08/27/2001 08:19 PM
---------------------------
Xuan.Sun@Seagate.com@groupstudy.com on 08/27/2001 07:31:54 PM
Please respond to Xuan.Sun@Seagate.com
Sent by: nobody@groupstudy.com
To: "Fred Danson" <fred190044@hotmail.com>
cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: LOCAL_PREF example in Doyle, Routing TCP/IP Volume II page
242
Here is the configuration for all six routers involved. The "show ip BGP"
result also provide.
(See attached file: pp242.txt)(See attached file: show-bgp.txt)
"Fred Danson" <fred190044@hotmail.com>@groupstudy.com on 08/27/2001
06:26:52 AM
Please respond to "Fred Danson" <fred190044@hotmail.com>
Sent by: nobody@groupstudy.com
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
cc: Xuan.Sun@Seagate.com
Subject: Re: LOCAL_PREF example in Doyle, Routing TCP/IP Volume II page
242
Xuan,
Would you mind posting the configs of Innsbruck, Zermatt, and Mortiz? Also,
could you make sure that Zermatt is capable of pinging the RIDs of
Innsbruck
and Mortiz?
Fred
>From: Xuan.Sun@Seagate.com
>Reply-To: Xuan.Sun@Seagate.com
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: LOCAL_PREF example in Doyle, Routing TCP/IP Volume II page 242
>Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2001 20:13:30 -0700
>
>Hi All
>
>I have posted a message talking about LOCAL_PREF before. I hit this
problem
>again when I tried the example on Dolye's book.
>
>The diagram and configuration are at Page 242-243. Dolye uses this example
>to manipulate the LOCAL_PREFERENCE. So it will take the route to AS 50
>using Innsbruck, AS 75 using Saalbach.
>
>On Zermatt, there are two paths to reach AS 75, for example the route
>172.18.0.0. It either takes Innsbruck or Moritz. The Innsbruck is the EBGP
>peer. Moritz is the IBGP peer. Because the Innsbruck is the EBGP peer. BGP
>always uses it as the next hop.
>
>Dolye assigns a high Local_Pref number (300) on Moritz. It send to
Zermatt.
>So on Zermatt, the next hop to 172.18.0.0 from Moritz increased to 300,
>instead of the default 100. So BGP will take Moritz as the next hop for
>172.18.0.0. The "show ip BGP" is on Page 244.
>
>I have built up the same network and configuration. But it does not work
in
>the way as Dolye's. I can see the Locale_Pref has been changed to 300. But
>BGP still takes Innsbruck. See my "show ip bgp" on Zermatt. I have aligned
>the output. But it may not display on your machine.
>
>Have somebody tested this configuration before ? Did you have the same
>problem ? Is it a IOS bug ? I am using 3810, IOS 12.0.(7)T for Moritz and
>Zermatt.
>
>Your feedback is highly appeciated. I am tied to this Locale_Pref
>attribute.
>
>Zermatt#sh ip bgp
>BGP table version is 23, local router ID is 172.30.255.254
>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
>* i10.20.0.0/16 172.30.255.150 100 0 100
>50 ?
>*> 10.100.83.1 200 0
>100 50 ?
>* i10.30.0.0/16 172.30.255.150 0 100 0
>?
>*> 192.168.3.3 0 32768
>?
>* i10.50.250.1/32 172.30.255.150 100 0
>100 50 ?
>*> 10.100.83.1 200 0
>100 50 ?
>* i10.75.100.1/32 172.30.255.150 100 0 100
>50 ?
>*> 10.100.83.1 200 0
>100 50 ?
>*> 10.100.65.1/32 10.100.83.1 200 0 100
>50 ?
>*>i10.100.83.1/32 172.30.255.150 100 0
>100 50 ?
>* i172.16.0.0 172.30.255.150 0 100 0
>?
>*> 192.168.3.3 0 32768
>?
>* i172.17.0.0 172.30.255.150 100 0
>100 50 ?
>*> 10.100.83.1 200 0
>100 50 ?
>* i172.18.0.0 172.30.255.150 300 0 100
>75 i
>*> 10.100.83.1 0
>100 75 i
>* i172.29.1.0/24 172.30.255.150 0 100 0
>?
>*> 192.168.3.3 0 32768
>?
>* i172.29.2.0/24 172.30.255.150 100 0
>100 50 ?
>*> 10.100.83.1 200 0
>100 50 ?
>*> 172.30.255.150/32
> 192.168.3.2 0 32768
> ?
>* i172.31.0.0 172.30.255.150 0 100 0 ?
>*> 192.168.3.3 0 32768
>?
>* i192.168.50.0 172.30.255.150 100 0
>100 50 ?
>*> 10.100.83.1 200 0
>100 50 ?
>* i192.168.100.0 172.30.255.150 0 100 0
>?
>*> 192.168.3.3 0 32768
>?
>**Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:31:59 GMT-3