From: steve.skinner@uk.pwc.com
Date: Fri Jan 14 2005 - 08:55:18 GMT-3
OK ,
shoot me if i`m wrong ...but the actual scenario doesn't call for nat ...
just the use of secondary address's ...
as was shown before you can just use the sec and peer directly ...
my question is ...why the nat ???
cheers
Stephen Skinner
micsoniu@telus.net
Sent by: To: "Alexander Arsenyev (GU/ETL)" <alexander.arsenyev@ericsson.com>
nobody@groupstudy.c cc: Group Study <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
om Subject: RE: BGP peering using secondary IP addresses ?!...
13/01/2005 19:38
Please respond to
micsoniu
Full wording:
Router R1 will peer with R2 using the secondary IP addresses assigned to
their
directly connected interfaces. You are not allowed to add new IP subnets to
the existing scenario.
The presented scenario does not have any loopback interfaces configured on
these two routers.
Thank you
Quoting "Alexander Arsenyev (GU/ETL)" <alexander.arsenyev@ericsson.com>:
> Not sure what are You asking for this time...Full task wording , please?
> The solution actually isn't adding any new IP addresses, it uses
secondary
> which is part of the original task.
> Cheers
> Alex
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: micsoniu@telus.net [mailto:micsoniu@telus.net]
> Sent: 13 January 2005 19:22
> To: Radu Pavaloiu
> Cc: Alexander Arsenyev (GU/ETL); Vazman@aol.com; Group Study
> Subject: RE: BGP peering using secondary IP addresses ?!...
>
>
> This is good solution. Thank you.
>
> Let's add to the drama: - you are not allowed to add any new IP addresses
to
>
> the network and there are no loopback interfaces pre-configured with IP
> addresses ?!...
>
>
>
> Quoting Radu Pavaloiu <Radu.Pavaloiu@connex.ro>:
>
> > It's works:
> >
> > R1
> >
> > interface Loopback1
> > ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255
> > ip nat inside
> > !
> > interface FastEthernet0/0
> > ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> > ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.0
> > ip nat outside
> > duplex auto
> > speed auto
> >
> > router bgp 100
> > no synchronization
> > bgp log-neighbor-changes
> > neighbor 192.168.1.2 remote-as 100
> > no auto-summary
> > !
> > ip local policy route-map bgp
> > ip nat inside source static 10.0.0.1 192.168.1.1 extendable
> > ip http server
> > ip classless
> > !
> > !
> > !
> > access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq bgp
> > !
> > route-map bgp permit 10
> > match ip address 100
> > set interface Loopback1
> >
> >
> > R2
> >
> > interface FastEthernet0/0
> > ip address 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0 secondary
> > ip address 10.0.0.2 255.255.255.0
> > duplex auto
> > speed auto
> >
> > router bgp 100
> > no synchronization
> > bgp log-neighbor-changes
> > neighbor 192.168.1.1 remote-as 100
> > no auto-summary
> >
> >
> > R1#show ip bgp summary
> > BGP router identifier 10.0.0.1, local AS number 100
> > BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1
> >
> > Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down
> > State/PfxRcd
> > 192.168.1.2 4 100 19 19 1 0 0 00:03:54
> > 0
> >
> > R2#show ip bgp summary
> > BGP router identifier 2.2.2.2, local AS number 100
> > BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1
> >
> > Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down
> > State/PfxRcd
> > 192.168.1.1 4 100 23 23 1 0 0 00:07:33
> > 0
> >
> > R1#show ip nat translations
> > Pro Inside global Inside local Outside local Outside
> > global
> > --- 192.168.1.1 10.0.0.1 --- ---
> > tcp 192.168.1.1:11011 10.0.0.1:11011 192.168.1.2:179
> > 192.168.1.2:179
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > I die. I fracture into thousands of fragments of flushed embarrassment.
> > My body parts fly, connectionless, over a badly constructed spanning
> > tree that isn't quite loop free.
> > I fall screaming into 127.0.0.1.
> >
> >
> > Radu
> > #2658
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > Alexander Arsenyev (GU/ETL)
> > Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 8:00 PM
> > To: 'Vazman@aol.com'; Group Study
> > Subject: RE: BGP peering using secondary IP addresses ?!...
> >
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > My take on it:
> > 1) PBR to loopback - "ip local policy route-map" and route-map should
> > have match on BGP and "set interface LoXX"
> > 2) "ip nat inside" on that loopback
> > 3) "ip nat inside source static" to translate primary into secondary
> > 4) "ip nat outside" on the outgoing interface
> >
> > Don't have a rack to test it at the moment :-]
> >
> > Anyone tell me why it shouldn't work?
> >
> > HTH,
> > Cheers
> > Alex
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]
> > Sent: 13 January 2005 17:33
> > To: micsoniu@telus.net; Group Study
> > Subject: Re: BGP peering using secondary IP addresses ?!...
> >
> >
> > By default, BGP will use the IP address of the outgoing interface as
the
> > source. The command "update-source" does not apply in this case as the
> > interface is still the same. The only thing that I can think of is to
> > use the BGP peering address as the primary address.
> >
> > Good scenario btw.
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 02 2005 - 22:10:22 GMT-3