From: Chua, Parry (Parry.Chua@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Dec 30 2001 - 21:59:53 GMT-3
Hi,
Do a show ip bgp a.b.c.d and see nwhat is the reason that it is NOT the
best route,
if it is "no sync" and the route of a.b.c.d is from ospf, then you
should check the RID
of the network a.b.c.d
> Parry Chua
>
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Oliver [mailto:stevie_oliver@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2001 7:02 PM
To: fred190044@hotmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: BGP routes.
Fred,
Well, for example, the 5.0.0.0 route is in the bgp table with next hop
as
137.6.2.17. This route is in the routing table, 137.6.2.16/30 but the 5
prefix is not marked as best in the bgp table. I am trying to do this
by
not setting no sync just to test the bgp rules. I thought that since
the
next hop is reachable through an IGP then it would be marked as *> in
the
bgp table. I can get the route to be marked as *> by setting no sync
but I
wanted to avoid using this if I could. I probably just misunderstand
the
synchronization rule.
Thanks, Stephen.
>From: "Fred Danson" <fred190044@hotmail.com>
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>CC: stevie_oliver@hotmail.com
>Subject: Re: BGP routes.
>Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 09:42:48 -0500
>
>Which prefix is not working properly? Do you have "no sync" set in this
>router? Would you mind posting your configs?
>
>
>>From: "Stephen Oliver" <stevie_oliver@hotmail.com>
>>Reply-To: "Stephen Oliver" <stevie_oliver@hotmail.com>
>>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>>Subject: BGP routes.
>>Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:09:54 +0000
>>
>>I have a BGP network with OSPF running along side. A loopback
propogates
>>through the BGP tables but on one router it is not installed as best
even
>>though OSPF provides a route to the next hop in the routing table. I
>>thought if this criteria was met the BGP table would mark the route as
>
>>for
>>best. The routing and BGP tables are below.
>>
>>Any ideas ?
>>
>>Thanks, Stephen.
>>
>>Gateway of last resort is not set
>>
>> 137.6.0.0/16 is variably subnetted, 9 subnets, 4 masks
>>O 137.6.2.9/32 [110/128] via 137.6.2.10, 00:00:12, Serial0/0
>>C 137.6.2.8/29 is directly connected, Serial0/0
>>O 137.6.2.10/32 [110/64] via 137.6.2.10, 00:41:05, Serial0/0
>>O IA 137.6.2.2/32 [110/129] via 137.6.2.10, 00:08:44, Serial0/0
>>O E2 137.6.1.1/32 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:08:44, Serial0/0
>>O IA 137.6.5.5/32 [110/65] via 137.6.2.10, 00:08:44, Serial0/0
>>C 137.6.3.3/32 is directly connected, Loopback0
>>C 137.6.3.16/28 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
>>O 137.6.2.16/30 [110/176] via 137.6.2.10, 00:41:06, Serial0/0
>>O E2 5.0.0.0/8 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:08:46, Serial0/0
>>O E2 6.0.0.0/8 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:08:46, Serial0/0
>>O E2 7.0.0.0/8 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:08:46, Serial0/0
>>2612#show ip bgp
>>BGP table version is 4, local router ID is 137.6.3.3
>>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
>>* i5.0.0.0 137.6.2.17 0 100 0 111 100 i
>>* i6.0.0.0 137.6.2.17 0 100 0 100 i
>>* i7.0.0.0 137.6.2.17 0 100 0 100 i
>>* i137.6.1.1/32 137.6.2.17 0 100 0 100 i
>>* i137.6.2.2/32 137.6.2.9 0 100 0 i
>>* i137.6.2.8/29 137.6.2.10 0 100 0 i
>>*> 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>* i137.6.2.16/30 137.6.2.9 0 100 0 i
>>*> 137.6.3.3/32 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>* 137.6.3.16/28 137.6.3.18 0 0 300 i
>>*> 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:49 GMT-3