From: Venkataramanaiah.R (vramanaiah@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Nov 24 2005 - 08:20:56 GMT-3
I do not understand the need for tunnel interfaces here for the IBGP
to work via R2. Am i missing something here?
-Venkat
On 11/24/05, Tim <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> A couple things I noticed:
>
> 1) The tunnel endpoints should be on R1 and R4, not R2.
>
> 2) You didn't adjust the cost of the tunnel to make it less preferred path
> than the physical path.
>
> 3) I would use the physical interface as the tunnel source on each router.
>
> 4) If using the lo0 for the tunnel ip address doesn't work, you can try
> using the ip address of the physical interface for the tunnel address.
>
> Just a couple ideas,
>
> Tim
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Anthony Sequeira
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 9:42 PM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: Let's Tunnel BGP Due to Non-BGP Speaker in Transit Path!
>
> I want to tunnel my iBGP peering from R1 to R4 because R2 is not running
> BGP. I want to use the loopback 0 interfaces for the peerings. The IGP in
> use is EIGRP and all of the interfaces shown below are running EIGRP.
>
>
>
> R1-----4.4.8.0/24-----R2-----4.4.12.0/24-----R4
>
>
>
> R1 lo0 4.4.1.1/24
>
> R4 lo0 4.4.4.4/24
>
>
>
> I have this sample scenario labbed up and I am having a heck of a time. I
> have tried the following with no luck:
>
>
>
> Attempt 1
>
> R1:
>
> int tunnel 0
>
> ip unnumbered lo0
>
> tunnel source 4.4.8.1
>
> tunnel destination 4.4.12.4
>
>
>
> R2:
>
> int tunnel 0
>
> ip unnumbered lo0
>
> tunnel source 4.4.12.4
>
> tunnel destination 4.4.8.1
>
>
>
> Attempt 2
>
> R1:
>
> int tunnel 0
>
> ip unnumbered lo0
>
> tunnel source lo0
>
> tunnel destination 4.4.4.4
>
>
>
> R2:
>
> int tunnel 0
>
> ip unnumbered lo0
>
> tunnel source lo0
>
> tunnel destination 4.4.1.1
>
>
>
> You see this is easy and works great if I create a new subnet for the
> tunnel and use that in my BGP peerings the issue that I am having is
> trying to use the loopback addresses for the peerings and still use my
> tunnel.
>
>
>
> I notice that my tunnel interface does not show up in the routing table when
> I am pulling the address from the loopback..I guess this must be why my BGP
> is not using it????
>
>
>
> Anyone feel like labbing this one up and trying this one? Or is it something
> really simple that I am missing about tunnels?
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance for you consideration of this e-mail.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:07 GMT-3