From: Khalid Siddiq (khalid@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Thu Aug 29 2002 - 05:07:11 GMT-3
Mingzhou,
it will not work if R2 and R6 are in AS 65200, that is if R2 has IBGP peering w
ith R6.
can someone clarify that.
regards,
khalid
-----Original Message-----
From: Mingzhou Nie [mailto:mnie@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 5:22 AM
To: Nick Shah; Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE); ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Again BGP sync/rid problem
Damn, why didn't I think deeper into confed :) Nick's right.
It works!!!
r1
router bgp 65100
bgp router-id 133.7.1.1
bgp log-neighbor-changes
bgp confederation identifier 2010
bgp confederation peers 65200
neighbor 133.7.12.2 remote-as 65200
neighbor 133.7.12.2 ebgp-multihop 3
neighbor 133.7.12.2 next-hop-self
neighbor 133.7.66.2 remote-as 2001
r141#b
BGP table version is 5, local router ID is 133.7.1.1
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
*> 160.100.100.0/24 133.7.66.2 0 0 2001 i
*> 160.100.128.0/24 133.7.66.2 0 0 2001 i
*> 160.100.129.0/24 133.7.66.2 0 0 2001 i
*> 160.100.130.0/24 133.7.66.2 0 0 2001 i
r141#
r2
!
router bgp 65200
bgp router-id 133.7.2.2
bgp log-neighbor-changes
bgp confederation identifier 2010
bgp confederation peers 65100 65300
neighbor 133.7.11.1 remote-as 65100
neighbor 133.7.11.1 ebgp-multihop 3
neighbor 133.7.13.2 remote-as 65300
neighbor 133.7.13.2 ebgp-multihop 3
!
r142#b
BGP table version is 5, local router ID is 133.7.2.2
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
*> 160.100.100.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65100)
2001 i
*> 160.100.128.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65100)
2001 i
*> 160.100.129.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65100)
2001 i
*> 160.100.130.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65100)
2001 i
r142#
r6
router bgp 65300
bgp router-id 133.7.6.6
bgp log-neighbor-changes
bgp confederation identifier 2010
bgp confederation peers 65200
neighbor 133.7.12.2 remote-as 65200
neighbor 133.7.12.2 ebgp-multihop 3
!
r146#b
BGP table version is 13, local router ID is 133.7.6.6
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
*> 160.100.100.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65200
65100) 2001 i
*> 160.100.128.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65200
65100) 2001 i
*> 160.100.129.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65200
65100) 2001 i
*> 160.100.130.0/24 133.7.11.1 0 100 0 (65200
65100) 2001 i
r146#
--- Nick Shah <nshah@connect.com.au> wrote:
> Dmitry
>
> The only sure shot way to avoid the 'ugliness' of manipulating the
> BGP &
> OSPF RID's is to get away and not use the Route reflectors at all.
>
> Instead, use Confeds, you will not have synch issues then. That way
> you can
> have the best of both the worlds and you can easily satisfy the
> condition of
> not having to full mesh them, by making only one 'confed AS' neighbor
> with
> the other 2 confed AS (dont create the peership between the 2 confed
> AS's,
> just like you would do in RRc's)
>
>
> rgds
> Nick
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mingzhou Nie" <mnie@yahoo.com>
> To: "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" <dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 8:58 AM
> Subject: RE: Again BGP sync/rid problem
>
>
> > Dmitry,
> >
> > Here are the things that I tried when working on this kind of
> scenario.
> >
> > - change ospf to bgp redistribution from r1 to r2
> >
> > this won't work because you can only redistribute EBGP into igrp
> >
> > - turn off sync on r6
> >
> > this will work, but may not be allowed.
> >
> > - change bgp route-id on r2 the same as ospf route-id on r1, then
> you
> > have to either update r1's bgp id or r2's ospf id, or it will break
> > either ospf or bgp. However, now r2, the RR gets bgp routes from r1
> > with different ospf and bgp id(because on r1, their id are
> different
> > now), so you have to turn off sync on RR
> >
> > this will work too, but you have to turn off sync on RR, plus
> route-id
> > on r1 and r1 are really ugly
> >
> > - if both r2 and r6 are not allowed "no sync", and "r1 and r6 can
> only
> > have one neibough"(basically you have to use RR), then there's no
> way
> > to make it work
> >
> > maybe other people have more thoughts?
> >
> > ming
> > --- "Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)" <dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com>
> wrote:
> > > Hello group,
> > >
> > > Nobody answered yet !!!
> > > Is this absolutely no real life case ???
> > >
> > > Shortly again :) - When we redistr BGP into OSPF, OSPF creates
> LSA 5
> > > flooded
> > > anywhere (with except stubs)
> > > These LSAs have ADV Router (in ospf DB) with RID of redistr
> router.
> > > When Route reflector gets BGP route from redistr router - OSPF
> RID
> > > and BGP
> > > RID of route learned via OSPF and via BGP are equal. So route is
> > > "synchronized, best"
> > > When BGP route is reflected from RR to internal peers - OSPF RID
> of
> > > Originator of route is still the same ("from RID of redist
> router" -
> > > LSA 5
> > > are not changed), but route learned via BGP shows "from RID of
> RR",
> > > despite
> > > that Originator of route is still the same and because, I guess,
> OSPF
> > > RID
> > > doesn't match BGP RID where route learned from - route "not
> > > synchronized"
> > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/25.shtml
> > >
> > > What to do ?? if Sync must be enabled and IBGP full mesh is not
> > > allowed.
> > >
> > > Can we say that if Sync enabled with OSPF - IBGP has to be full
> > > meshed ???
> > > R2 -is RR, R1 - redistr point from BGP to OSPF, R6 - RR client
> (R1,
> > > R2 and
> > > R6 in the same AS)
> > > route 160.100.100.0/24 - learned by R1 via EBGP:
> > >
> > > r2#sh ip bgp 160.100.100.0
> > > BGP routing table entry for 160.100.100.0/24, version 10
> > > Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
> > > Advertised to non peer-group peers:
> > > 133.7.4.4 133.7.6.6
> > > 2001, (Received from a RR-client)
> > > 133.7.1.1 (metric 75) from 133.7.1.1 (133.7.1.1)
> <-----------
> > > DIFFERENCE !!!
> > > Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal,
> > > synchronized,
> > > best
> > >
> > > r2#sh ip ro 160.100.100.0
> > > Routing entry for 160.100.100.0/24
> > > Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 1
> > > Tag 2, type extern 2, forward metric 74
> > > Last update from 133.7.28.3 on Ethernet0/0, 02:28:36 ago
> > > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> > > * 133.7.28.3, from 133.7.1.1, 02:28:36 ago, via Ethernet0/0
> > > Route metric is 1, traffic share count is 1
> > >
> ====================================================================
> > > r6#sh ip bgp 160.100.100.0
> > > BGP routing table entry for 160.100.100.0/24, version 0
> > > Paths: (1 available, no best path)
> > > Not advertised to any peer
> > > 2001
> > > 133.7.1.1 (metric 75) from 133.7.2.2 (133.7.2.2)
> <-------------
> > > DIFFERENCE !!!
> > > Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, not
> > > synchronized
> > > Originator: 133.7.1.1, Cluster list: 133.7.2.2
> > >
> > > r6#sh ip ro 160.100.100.0
> > > Routing entry for 160.100.100.0/24
> > > Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 1
> > > Tag 2, type extern 2, forward metric 74
> > > Last update from 133.7.28.3 on Ethernet0, 02:29:31 ago
> > > Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> > > * 133.7.28.3, from 133.7.1.1, 02:29:31 ago, via Ethernet0
> > > Route metric is 1, traffic share count is 1
> > >
> > >
> > > Dmitry
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Volkov, Dmitry (Toronto - BCE)
> [mailto:dmitry_volkov@ca.ml.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 11:14 AM
> > > To: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> > > Subject: Again BGP sync/rid problem
> > >
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Well, now I'm also stacked with this Sysnc/RID problem.
> > > I'm doing Solie's "Unnamed Lab". The requirement : Syncronize BGP
> > > with OSPF.
> > >
> > > R1 (rid 133.7.1.1) runs BGP AS 2010 and peering with backbone
> router
> > > AS
> > > 2001.
> > > R1 gets 4 EBGP routes from Backbone.
> > > R1 runs IBGP with R2 (rid 133.7.2.2), R2 runs IBGP with R6 (rid
> > > 133.7.6.6).
> > > There is OSPF between R1, R2, R6.
> > > R2, R3 and R6 on common ethernet segment. R2 and R6 connected to
> R1
> > > via R3
> > > (which runs OSPF only, NO BGP)
> > > R1----R3----R2
> > > |
> > > R6
> > > So
> > > 1)I redistributed BGP to OSPF on R1 with next-hop-self , R2 is OK
> -
> > > all BGP
> > > routes from Backbone are valid:
> > >
> > > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
> > > *>i160.100.100.0/24 133.7.1.1 0 100 0 2001
> i
> > > *>i160.100.128.0/24 133.7.1.1 0 100 0 2001
> i
> > > *>i160.100.129.0/24 133.7.1.1 0 100 0 2001
> i
> > > *>i160.100.130.0/24 133.7.1.1 0 100 0 2001
> i
> > > r2#
> > >
> > > 2) made R2 as Route reflector.
> > > R6 gets BGP routes from backbone via R2. But these routes are not
> > > synchronized.
>
=== message truncated ===
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:41 GMT-3