RE: set metric on route-map applied to OSPF distribute-list

From: Gustavo Novais (gustavo.novais@novabase.pt)
Date: Sat Dec 17 2005 - 16:56:20 GMT-3


I just wanted to make a nice and versatile solution... not change costs and
match specific routes... but...

If it is necessary...

Gustavo Novais

________________________________

From: Josef A [mailto:josefnet@gmail.com]
Sent: sabado, 17 de Dezembro de 2005 19:53
To: Gustavo Novais
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: Re: set metric on route-map applied to OSPF distribute-list route-map
XXXX in

Hello,

Try matching on the input interface instead of the next-hop.

Remember also that the router still computes the routes from the LSAs which
are not filtered, and cost is an LSA attribute.

So this might(?) not be possible using a distribute-list.

Just a thought.

Thanks

Josef.

On 12/17/05, Gustavo Novais <gustavo.novais@novabase.pt> wrote:

Hello

I'm trying to make OSPF decide between two paths without changing any
interface values.

The same routes are coming from both paths(two different interfaces),
but only the ones tagged with 10 are to be decided upon one interface or
the other. When one path is not available, the other path should kick
in.

To do this I'm trying to build a route-map like this.

router ospf 1

router-id 150.1.5.5

distribute-list route-map AS10-PREFER in

route-map AS10-PREFER permit 10

match ip next-hop R4

match tag 10

set metric 20

!

route-map AS10-PREFER permit 20

match ip next-hop R3

match tag 10

set metric 30

!

route-map AS10-PREFER permit 30

This, theoretically would allow me to enter on the RIB the routes with
smaller metric.

The problem is that OSPF keeps ignoring my set statements and keeps the
routes always with metric 20, thus allowing load sharing to the tagged
paths.

The target routes are E2, but shouldn't the route-map act upon their
metric nonetheless?

Or because I'm using the route-map on a distribute-list the set commands
are not valid?

TIA

Gustavo Novais



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 09 2006 - 07:07:51 GMT-3