From: Erich Borchert (erichb80@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Feb 21 2002 - 00:08:07 GMT-3
The loopback is a connected route on router 1 & must be injected into bgp
via redistribute connected command on router 1. The whole LSA database
won't be injected into BGP just the ospf lsa's installed in the routing
table.
R2 has the loopback installed into the RIB on router 2, learned via OSPF &
therefore eligble for redistribution into BGP on router 2
HTH
-Erich
----- Original Message -----
From: "Przemyslaw Karwasiecki" <karwas@ifxcorp.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 7:39 PM
Subject: beating a dead horse (redistribution again)
> All,
>
> I am desperatly trying to find some deeper logic
> in the way how redistribution works.
>
> There are 2 routers. They exchange prefixes via iBGP.
> There is no static injection into BGP on any of them.
>
> Step 1
> ------
>
> 1. router 1 runs rip on its loopback
> 2. router 1 runs ospf on its ethernet
> 3. router 1 redistributes rip into ospf
> -- verifications that this redistribution works:
> a) sh ip ospf database external - shows loopback ip there
> b) sh ip route on router 2 - shows loopback ip as O E2
> 4. router 1 redistributes ospf (internal external 1 external 2)
> into BGP.
> Problem:
> The only route in BGP is IP of the ethernet.
> Route redistributed from rip is missing in BGP.
>
> Step 2
> ------
> 1. router 2 runs ospf and is adjacent with r1
> -- both routes originated on r1 are shown in RIB on roter 2:
> a) ethernet route as 0
> b) loopback route as O E2 (redistributed as such from rip on r1)
> 2. redistribution from ospf into bgp is removed from router 1
> 3. redistribution from ospf into bgp is configured on router 2
> (internal external 1 external 2)
> 4. All ospf routes (O and O E2) are redistributed into BGP.
>
> Why -- ????
>
> Why the same redistribution, from the same OSPF database
> performed on 2 routers have different results????
>
> And, please note that in step 1 redistribution was partially
> sucsesfull, DESPITE of the fack that no prefixes has been in RIB.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> And, please forgive me if I have overlooked some recent posts
> about how redistribution REALLY work. I was following them,
> but maybe I overlooked some post addressing my question.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Przemek
>
> PS. Similar problem is in well known lab number 2, but what I presented
> here is totally generic.....
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 20 2002 - 13:46:29 GMT-3