From: kenairs (kenairs@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jan 01 2002 - 04:51:43 GMT-3
Hi Peter,
Can elarborate more on the OSPF router id and Bgp Peer id ?
Tks
----- Original Message -----
From: Peter van Oene <pvo@usermail.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: BGP routes.
> Its really an OSPF Rid vs BGP peer id issue here. There is no routing
loop
> to speak of.
>
>
> At 01:59 PM 1/1/2002 +1100, you wrote:
> >Hi All,
> > >From what I see in the IP routing table, there is a loop for
destination
> >137.6.2.10.
> >The next-hop for 5.0.0.0 in the BGP table is 137.6.2.17, so a recursive
> >lookup
> >for this destination in the IP routing table results in 137.6.2.10 as the
> >next-hop.
> >We still require another recursive lookup to decide which interface to
> >switch the
> >traffic to, and this results in 137.6.2.10 with a next-hop of 137.6.2.10
> >(loop).
> >Serial0/0 is still noted as the outgoing interface, so whatever is on the
> >other end
> >of Serial0/0 will receive the packet at layer2 & (most likely) has the
same
> >issue
> >for the layer3 destination, and switch it back out the incoming
interface.
> >
> >I would clear ip route * and clear ip bgp *, debug reconvergance &
> >check again.
> >
> >Brett.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Peter van Oene" <pvo@usermail.com>
> >To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2002 8:47 AM
> >Subject: RE: BGP routes.
> >
> >
> > > As others have found before, OSPF RID and BGP Peer Address must match
when
> > > running synchronized. Though I still can't for the life of me figure
out
> > > why you guys test 9-10 year old commands. You just might give the
> > > otherwise sane proctors a reason to test you on this antique stuff.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >At 01:53 PM 12/31/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> > > >>Parry,
> > > >>
> > > >>Here's the BGP table and routing table along with the output from
one of
> > > >>the prefixes not being marked as best.
> > > >>
> > > >>As you see the route has a next hop of 137.6.2.17 from router with
RID
> >of
> > > >>137.6.2.2. Both these prefixes are in the main routing table so my
> > > >>understanding was that the route should be marked best. I know I
can
> > > >>turn off synchronization and get it to work but I didn't think I had
to
> > > >>if the next hop was reachable. If I have to do a no sync then fine
and
> > > >>my understanding of the rule is at fault.
> > > >>
> > > >>Thanks, Stephen.
> > > >>
> > > >> Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
> > > >>* i0.0.0.0 137.6.2.9 100 0 i
> > > >>* i5.0.0.0 137.6.2.17 0 100 0 111 100
i
> > > >>* i6.0.0.0 137.6.2.17 0 100 234 100 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
> > > >>2612#show ip bgp 5.0.0.0
> > > >>BGP routing table entry for 5.0.0.0/8, version 0
> > > >>Paths: (1 available, no best path)
> > > >> Not advertised to any peer
> > > >> 111 100
> > > >> 137.6.2.17 (metric 176) from 137.6.2.10 (137.6.2.2)
> > > >> Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, not
> >synchronized
> > > >> Originator: 137.6.2.2, Cluster list: 137.6.5.5
> > > >>2612#show 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
> > > >> N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type
2
> > > >> E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP
> > > >> i - IS-IS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2, ia - IS-IS
> > > >> inter area
> > > >> * - candidate default, U - per-user static route, o - ODR
> > > >> P - periodic downloaded static route
> > > >>
> > > >>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, 00:04:25, 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, 00:04:25, Serial0/0
> > > >>O IA 137.6.2.2/32 [110/129] via 137.6.2.10, 00:02:30, Serial0/0
> > > >>O IA 137.6.5.5/32 [110/65] via 137.6.2.10, 00:02:30, Serial0/0
> > > >>O E2 137.6.1.1/32 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:02:30, 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, 00:04:26, Serial0/0
> > > >>O E2 5.0.0.0/8 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:02:31, Serial0/0
> > > >>O E2 6.0.0.0/8 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:02:31, Serial0/0
> > > >>O E2 7.0.0.0/8 [110/78] via 137.6.2.10, 00:02:31, Serial0/0
> > > >>2612#
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>>From: "Chua, Parry" <Parry.Chua@compaq.com>
> > > >>>To: "Stephen Oliver" <stevie_oliver@hotmail.com>,
> > > >>><fred190044@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > >>>Subject: RE: BGP routes.
> > > >>>Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 08:59:53 +0800
> > > >>>
> > > >>>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 - 10:56:13 GMT-3