From: michael robertson (michael_w_2ca@xxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Feb 15 2002 - 14:43:07 GMT-3
strange question:
can anyone out there help me to solve the following
problem. the scenario is as follows:
R4 is in As 400, R5 is in AS 500, R1 R2 and R3 are all
in the same AS 100. among R1 R2 R3, it's running isis
or rip ( any IGP).there is no IBGP connection between
R1 and R3. R6, R7 is in AS 600. amont R4, R5, R6, they
are running ebgp. R4 and R1, R5 and R3 is running
EBGP.
R1 and R3 are redistribution point where there are
mutual ridistribution between ISIS and bgp.
Then the problem happens.network 172.16.1.0 can be
learn by R4 with best next hop R1. and R1 has route
to 172.16.1.0 with best next hop as his own connected
interface to R2.
I guess the reason is that when R1 and R3 learn the
route from R4 and R5 from ebgp, then it's
redistributed to isis, then redistributed back to
ebgp.
i.e. 172.16.1.0 can propagate to R6--R5--R3 by ebgp,
then in R3, it's redistributed into ISIS and propagate
to R2-R1 by ISIS. then in R1, it's redistributed to
BGP, here, in R1, R1 consider that it's locally got
the route, thus he give the route 172.16.1.0 a weight
32768 which has preference over the route learn from
R4.
That's explain the reason why it got the route like
that. Am i right? or how Can i solve the problem?
as always, any help will be greatly appreciated
Regards
michael
*****************************************
network 172.16.1.0
R7----R6
|
|
R4-------|--------R5
| |
| |
| |
R1------R2--------R3
192.168.1.0
******************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:24 GMT-3