From: Luis Rueda (luis.rueda@comsat.com.co)
Date: Tue Oct 11 2005 - 16:05:59 GMT-3
Andrew,
Actually it is.... I didn't notice at first..
Regards,
Luis Rueda
CCNP, CCIP
________________________________
From: Andrew Lissitz (alissitz) [mailto:alissitz@cisco.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:34 PM
To: Luis Rueda; Bob Sinclair; C&S GroupStudy; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: BGP - Tags
Hello Luis and group,
Luis; I added your request to this email thread so as to keep this
thread in sync. You asked for the show ip bgp output 10.131.96.0. Bob
mentioned that this was normal, is this what you see as well?
If anyone has any comments to my last email, I would greatly appreciate
it. Kindest regards,
PE1#sh ip bgp 10.131.96.0
BGP routing table entry for 10.131.96.0/24, version 17
Paths: (2 available, best #2)
Not advertised to any peer
200
10.131.63.226 (metric 116) from 10.131.63.255 (10.131.63.255)
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal
Originator: 10.131.63.251, Cluster list: 10.131.63.255
200
10.131.31.242 (metric 106) from 10.131.31.255 (10.131.31.255)
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, best
Originator: 10.131.31.251, Cluster list: 10.131.31.255
PE1#sho ver
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) 3600 Software (C3640-P-M), Version 12.0(25)S, EARLY DEPLOYMENT
RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
________________________________
From: Andrew Lissitz (alissitz)
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 11:06 AM
To: 'Bob Sinclair'; C&S GroupStudy; Cisco certification
Subject: RE: BGP - Tags
You rock Bob! I guess I never noticed this in the past ... sometimes I
need to smell the roses. Does anyone know if this was always the case?
With this info now... can we do clever tricks with filtering just as if
we had set the tags ourselves? Sorry if this should be self explanatory
.... it seems convenient to have these tags put on auto-magically...
________________________________
From: Bob Sinclair [mailto:bob@bobsinclair.net]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:58 AM
To: Andrew Lissitz (alissitz); C&S GroupStudy; Cisco certification
Subject: Re: BGP - Tags
Andrew,
This does appear to be normal behavior. I also see the AS number from
which this AS learned the prefix as a TAG.
HTH,
Bob Sinclair
CCIE #10427, CCSI 30427, CISSP
www.netmasterclass.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew Lissitz (alissitz) <mailto:alissitz@cisco.com>
To: C&S GroupStudy <mailto:comserv@groupstudy.com> ; Cisco
certification <mailto:ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 10:00 AM
Subject: BGP - Tags
Hello Folk,
In a lab I was doing I, there were multiple BGP AS#s. All the
BGP
routers were speaking to each other. There were no problems
with
routing or anything ... my question is related to some show
commands I
saw. Here goes:
PE1#show ip route 10.131.96.0
Routing entry for 10.131.96.0/24
Known via "bgp 100", distance 200, metric 0
Tag 200, type internal
Last update from 10.131.31.242 4d22h ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 10.131.31.242, from 10.131.31.255, 4d22h ago
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
AS Hops 1, BGP network version 0
Route tag 200
@ the bottom of this you will see the tag 200. This was learned
from a
bgp AS # 200. There was no tagging set (please do not ask for
configs)
... This is a MPLS lab / network ... I would not think that this
would
make a difference ...
Is this normal... BGP 'auto tagging' of routes learned from
different AS
numbers?
Kindest regards,
Andrew
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Nov 06 2005 - 22:00:50 GMT-3