From: Peter McCreesh (petermccreesh@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Jan 13 2006 - 18:59:15 GMT-3
Thanks for that Scott.
I was thinking about changing the distance for all BGP routes but then, when
they are redistributed into EIGRP (say on R1 just for talks sake) R2 will
see these with an AD of 170 so I suppose it will still work but the choice
of path may or may not be an issue. Makes more sense to do the
redistribution on both routers anyway.
Interesting one anyway. Probably worth labbing up to mess around with.
Regards,
Pete
On 1/13/06, Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
>
> Great question, and only he can answer that part! :)
>
> Even if it is SP controlled though, you could always do an as-path prepend
> to give yourself something to filter with on the other side. The community
> part would be up to the SP passing that along! I just like to pretend
they
> cooperate and play nicely with others! (grin)
>
> But what I'm thinking of is that the CE talks to the PE via BGP. The PE's
> pass that info along. If the provider is doing things like an AS-override,
> then all bets are off! :) Otherwise, the only other thing that pops to
> mind is setting the MED. But I highly doubt the SP would care to preseve
> that.
>
> I was just trying to think of something that could be set on one side,
> seen on the other side and used in a route-map to filter out as needed.
> Although the more I look at it, I'm thinking that setting bgp weights is
> probably a safer idea (AD weight, not the "weight" neighbor part) so that
> EIGRP routes would be preferred over eBGP-learned routes.
>
> "distance bgp 200 200 200" was my thought on this. That would handle
> making the internal EIGRP routes AND external ones (90 and 170) preferred
so
> that anything available via the L3 switch would work better. That would be
> the "yes or no" version of failover. He may want to get more particular
> with some things prefer one way over another which gets back to the
> filtering or weighting on BGP side.
>
> Scott
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Peter McCreesh [mailto:petermccreesh@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, January 13, 2006 1:44 PM
> *To:* swm@emanon.com
> *Cc:* topgun topgun; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> *Subject:* Re: Redistribution BGP-EIGRP
>
> Hi Scott,
>
> Does this solution assume that you have control of the BGP router(s) in
> the MPLS cloud.
>
> I was working on this as if it was the SP who owned the MPLS routers and
> as a result, weren't allowed to be changed.
>
> I may be misunderstanding however. (I know you have no more info than I do
> but what i'm getting at is the solution(s) you mentioned. They would be
> implemented on the MPLS BGP router(s)??)
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Pete
>
> On 1/13/06, Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
> >
> > You could also consider things inside BGP like adding a bogus private AS
> > to
> > the path, or setting a community and then filtering that on the other
> > side....
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> > topgun topgun
> > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 8:20 AM
> > To: topgun topgun; Peter McCreesh
> > Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Redistribution BGP-EIGRP
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Just having this thought that BGP distance might not be a good
> > solution,
> > as I have about 300-400 EIGRP routes inside the L3.
> >
> > And also if new routes are added or coming in from the L3, does it
> > mean I
> > have to add the new subnet into the access-list.
> >
> > Is there a better way to resolve this issue?
> >
> > Thanks in advnace.
> >
> > Top
> >
> > topgun topgun <topgunrs1@yahoo.com.sg> wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> >
> > The problem is when the R1 link to L3 switch is down, the R1 will still
> > need
> > to reach 9.9.9.9 and 99.99.99.99. I can't filter the routes coming in
> > from
> > MPLS (which is sent by R2). At this time, there is 9.9.9.9 and
> > 99.99.99.99
> > BGP routes
> >
> > When I bring up the R1 link to L3, the eigrp is formed. But my R1 still
> > prefer BGP routes. This is not desirable.
> >
> > I tried using distance command for EIGRP routes in BGP protocol, and
> > seem
> > ok. Thanks to Gustavo's suggestion... :)
> >
> > e.g
> > router bgp 65007
> > distance 171 remote MPLS interface 0.0.0.0 9
> >
> > access-list 9 permit 9.9.9.9
> > access-list 9 permit 99.99.99.99
> >
> > Any comment in using this distance command in BGP?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Top
> >
> >
> > Peter McCreesh
> > wrote:
> > Hi Top,
> >
> > would it be an option to filter your own nets ( 9.9.9.9 and 99.99.99.99)
> > out
> > of the BGP updates coming in from the MPLS cloud. You could then do a
> > soft
> > reset on your BGP neighbor so the peering will stay up but your networks
> >
> > should then "disappear" from the BGP updates coming in to you. Probably
> > best
> > to do this on both R1 and R2
> >
> > I hope i'm understanding your problem OK
> >
> > ..Pete
> >
> >
> > On 1/13/06, topgun topgun wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I am having some design issue and would like to seek some advise.
> > >
> > > I have 2 routers, and their WAN link are connected to MPLS running
> > BGP.
> > > Their LAN are connected to different L3 switch running EIGRP. The 2 L3
> >
> > > switch are connected and run EIGRP too.
> > >
> > > MPLS cloud -----------R1 -----------L3 switch I I
> > > I-------------------------R2 ----------- L3 switch
> > >
> > >
> > > R1 and R2 are two redistribution point; redistribute EIGRP to BGP and
> > BGP
> > > to EIGRP.
> > >
> > > My EIGRP cloud (L3 switches) has internal and external network, say
> > > 9.9.9.9 (internal) and 99.99.99.99 (external)
> > >
> > > R1 will prefer both 9.9.9.9 and 99.99.99.99 via L3 switch, and as
> > such, R2
> > > will be via MPLS cloud (AD BGP 20 as compared to EIGRP 90 and 170).
> > > I want R2 to use L3 as the gateway like R1.
> > >
> > > Distance cannot be used as it can't work for external eigrp routes.
> > > bgp backdoor cannot work as I have to clear the ip bgp first.
> > >
> > > Appreciate your help.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Top
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage!
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Meet your soulmate!
> > Yahoo! Asia presents Meetic - where millions of singles gather
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage!
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 01 2006 - 07:45:49 GMT-3