From: steven.j.nelson@xxxxxx
Date: Tue Jun 04 2002 - 05:55:11 GMT-3
Paul
I understand what the problem is, infact I know how to overcome it. I guess
you didn't look at the best path selection criteria. I suggest you look at
the document instaed of seeing the title and going "What, this is a sync
problem." Here is the snip from that file.
Paths marked as "not synchronized" in the show ip bgp <longer-prefixes>
output. If BGP
synchronization is enabled, which it is by default in Cisco IOS . Software,
there must be a match for
the prefix in the IP routing table in order for an internal (iBGP) path to
be considered a valid path. If
the matching route is learned from an OSPF neighbor, its OSPF router ID must
match the BGP router
ID of the iBGP neighbor. Most users prefer to disable synchronization using
the no
synchronization BGP subcommand.
So I would suggest you read it and understand what is required, the doc can
be found under CCO, as you can see it does form a part of the best path
selection criteria because if the route is not synchroised with the IGP then
it cannot be selected as best or valid.
HTH
Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul [mailto:p_chopin@yahoo.com]
Sent: 03 June 2002 23:52
To: Nelson,SJ,Steven,IVNH33 C
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: BGP question
I tried archives , but they are down.It's not best
path
selection criteria, this synch problem. And it is
really interesting one.Those details will get you
during the lab.
Sincerely Paul
--- steven.j.nelson@bt.com wrote:
> Paul
>
> This has been documented to the nth degree in this
> group. See Pete Oene's
> posts for more info or check out CCO fro the BGP
> best path selection
> criteria, it is in the 1st or 2nd paragraph of that
> document, best download
> the PDF.
>
> I have it of you can't find it.
>
> HTH
>
> Thanks
>
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul [mailto:p_chopin@yahoo.com]
> Sent: 03 June 2002 22:06
> To: Michael Popovich
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: BGP question
>
>
> I'll send you confgis. I just hard coded routers id
> for both ospf anf bgp(they were diffrent on R1) new
> thing happened. Now R2 shows 200.200.201.0/24 as
> synchronize and pushes route to R3, but .. R3 shows
> route in BGP table as not synch. I rebooted all the
> routers and no change.
> --- Michael Popovich <m.popovich@mchsi.com> wrote:
> > I understand. I was just curious by that because
> it
> > is technically incorrect
> > for OSPF.
> >
> > Make sure the Router ID's are the same of both BGP
> > and OSPF. If you could
> > email me router configs that would help too.
> >
> > This is an odd one and I don't quite see the whole
> > picture.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > MP
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul" <p_chopin@yahoo.com>
> > To: "Michael Popovich" <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:34 PM
> > Subject: Re: BGP question
> >
> >
> > > From ospf looback. Doesn't make any difference
> if
> > I
> > > remove statement under router ospf and only use
> > > redistribute connected
> > > --- Michael Popovich <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> wrote:
> > > > Where is the /32 route coming from?
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Paul" <p_chopin@yahoo.com>
> > > > To: "Michael Popovich" <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:20 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: BGP question
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > R2#sh ip route
> > > > > 200.200.201.0/24 is variably subnetted,
> 2
> > > > > subnets, 2 masks
> > > > > O 200.200.201.1/32 [110/49] via
> > 135.5.34.6,
> > > > > 14:06:46, Serial0/0.1
> > > > > O E2 200.200.201.0/24 [110/20] via
> > 135.5.42.2,
> > > > > 14:06:36, TokenRing0/0
> > > > >
> > > > > --- Michael Popovich <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > What does your routing table look like on
> > R2?
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Paul" <p_chopin@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > To: "Michael Popovich"
> > <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > > > > > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 3:04 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: BGP question
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > R2#sh ip bgp 200.200.201.0
> > > > > > > BGP routing table entry for
> > 200.200.201.0/24,
> > > > > > version
> > > > > > > 0
> > > > > > > Paths: (1 available, no best path)
> > > > > > > Not advertised to any peer
> > > > > > > Local, (Received from a RR-client)
> > > > > > > 135.5.6.6 (metric 49) from 135.5.6.6
> > > > > > > (200.200.201.1)
> > > > > > > Origin incomplete, metric 0,
> > localpref
> > > > 100,
> > > > > > > valid, internal, not synchroni
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- Michael Popovich
> > <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > What is the output of "show ip bgp
> > > > > > 200.200.200.0" on
> > > > > > > > R2?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > MP
> > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > From: "Paul" <p_chopin@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > > > To: "Michael Popovich"
> > > > <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 2:57 PM
> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: BGP question
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > No , it isn't. The router is
> > > > > > > > 200.200.200.0/24.Really
> > > > > > > > > simple
> > > > > > > > > Paul
> > > > > > > > > --- Michael Popovich
> > > > <m.popovich@mchsi.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Remember that BGP by default
> > summarizes.
> > > > > > Check
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > make sure that the route
> > > > > > > > > > in the BGP table isn't a
> summarized
> > > > route of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > one
> > > > > > > > > > in the routing table.
> > > > > > > > > > If it is, BGP doesn't consider
> that
> > a
> > > > match.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > MP
> > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > > From: "Paul" <p_chopin@yahoo.com>
> > > > > > > > > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2002 2:13
> PM
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: BGP question
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Guys,
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm doing simple lab, and I
> can't
> > > > figure
> > > > > > out
> > > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > > > > is it
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > not working.
> > > > > > > > > > > I've got 3 routers in the same
> > > > > > > > AS:R1---R2----R3.
> > > > > > > > > > > Router R2 is route
> > > > > > reflector.Synchronization
> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > enable
> > > > > > > > > > > on all of them.All of them run
> > ospf as
> > > > > > well.
> > > > > > > > > > > I'm redistributing loopback on
> R1
> > into
> > > > BGP
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > OSPF
> > > > > > > > > > > through redistribute connected
> > > > .According
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > BGP I
> > > > > > > > > > > should have this loopback in BGP
> > on
> > > > all 3
> > > > > > > > routers.
> > > > > > > > > > But
> > > > > > > > > > > I can see this route in BGP only
> > on
> > > > R2,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > it's
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > > synchronized, which is strange
> > because
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > network
>
=== message truncated ===
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:12:23 GMT-3