From: Julius Kinsler (jkinsler@harbortech.com)
Date: Thu Apr 20 2006 - 14:36:30 GMT-3
Im sorry I meant aggregates in, not specifics. So when you use the
aggregate address command this works? Or have you not tried that? Is
there nothing on R1 or R2 that would filter out the 11.0.0.0 subnet?
-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Griffin [mailto:ngriffin@sio.midco.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 1:29 PM
To: Nick Griffin
Cc: Julius Kinsler; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: BGP Inject Map
The prefix list source of the peering address seems to work, as I am
able to re-originate the 10.0.0.0/24 from the 10.0.0.0/16 advertisement.
I'm thinking I need to do the route-map different. I've tried separate
prefix lists for the 11.0.0.0 network, and separate route map
statements. Both resulted in the same outcome, the creation of the
10.0.0.0/24 specific, and nothing for the 11.0.0.0 network.
Nick Griffin wrote:
> I used neither to get the more specifics in. What you see in the BGP
> output is the one specific 10.0.0.0/24, the rest are /16's. I used the
> inject route map in correlation with the prefix list on the downstream
> router, to inject more specifics from the received /16. Here's my
> route origination source config:
>
> Originating Router R2
> interface Loopback10
> ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.0.0
> !
> interface Loopback11
> ip address 11.0.0.1 255.255.0.0
> !
> interface Loopback12
> ip address 12.0.0.1 255.255.0.0
> !
> interface Loopback13
> ip address 13.0.0.1 255.255.0.0
>
> router bgp 200
> no synchronization
> bgp log-neighbor-changes
> network 10.0.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0
> network 11.0.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0
> network 12.0.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0
> network 13.0.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0
> neighbor 150.1.1.1 remote-as 100
> neighbor 150.1.1.1 ebgp-multihop 2
> neighbor 150.1.1.1 update-source Loopback0 no auto-summary
>
>
> Julius Kinsler wrote:
>> So in this confirguration you used the network statements to get the
>> more specific routes into the BGP table or the aggregate address
>> command? Both should work. In looking at the configs you post the
only
>> thing I wonder about is the ip route-source what happens if you
specify
>> the AS instead of using the prefix-list SOURCE? Have you tried that?
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
>> Nick Griffin
>> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 11:34 AM
>> To: Nick Griffin
>> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>> Subject: Re: BGP Inject Map
>>
>> My guess is that I am not handling this correctly with my prefix
lists
>> and route maps. Are separate prefix lists and route-map entries
required
>> to originate multiple subnets from the aggregates?
>>
>> Nick Griffin wrote:
>>
>>> In order for the bgp inject map to function correctly, does the
>>> network your trying to produce specific subnets from have to be
>>> originated into bgp via the aggregate address command? At first
>>> glance, I think that originating the network via the network
>>> statment and corresponding mask works. However when I tried to add a
>>> second subnet off of a different block(utilizing same prefix lists),
>>> I am unable to originate the more specifics. The setup is R2 is
>>> originating
>>>
>>
>>
>>> the routes from AS 200, and sending to R1 in AS100, which is
>>> attempting to inject more specific prefixes and send them to R3 in
>>> AS300. See below:
>>>
>>>
>>> originate->(R2)--EBGP--(R1)--EBGP--(R3)
>>>
>>> When using the network statements (10.0.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0, and
>>> 11.0.0.0 mask 255.255.0.0) upstream R2:
>>> R1 Config:
>>>
>>> router bgp 100
>>> bgp inject-map INJECT exist-map EXISTS !
>>> ip prefix-list AGGREGATE seq 5 permit 10.0.0.0/16 ip prefix-list
>>> AGGREGATE seq 10 permit 11.0.0.0/16 !
>>> ip prefix-list INJECT seq 5 permit 10.0.0.0/24 ip prefix-list INJECT
>>> seq 10 permit 11.0.0.0/24 !
>>> ip prefix-list SOURCE seq 5 permit 150.1.2.2/32 !
>>> !
>>> route-map EXISTS permit 10
>>> match ip address prefix-list AGGREGATE match ip route-source
>>> prefix-list SOURCE !
>>> route-map INJECT permit 10
>>> set ip address prefix-list INJECT
>>>
>>> R2#sh ip bgp
>>> BGP table version is 19, local router ID is 150.1.2.2 Status codes:
>>> s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
>>> r RIB-failure, S Stale
>>> Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
>>>
>>> Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
>>> *> 10.0.0.0/16 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>> *> 11.0.0.0/16 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>> *> 12.0.0.0/16 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>> *> 13.0.0.0/16 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
>>>
>>> R1#sh ip bgp
>>> BGP table version is 6, local router ID is 150.1.1.1 Status codes: s
>>> suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
>>> r RIB-failure, S Stale
>>> Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
>>>
>>> Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
>>> *> 10.0.0.0/24 150.1.2.2 0 ?
>>> *> 10.0.0.0/16 150.1.2.2 0 0 200 i
>>> *> 11.0.0.0/16 150.1.2.2 0 0 200 i
>>> *> 12.0.0.0/16 150.1.2.2 0 0 200 i
>>> *> 13.0.0.0/16 150.1.2.2 0 0 200 i
>>>
>>>
>>> R3#sh ip bgp
>>> BGP table version is 50, local router ID is 150.1.3.3 Status codes:
>>> s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
>>> r RIB-failure, S Stale
>>> Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
>>>
>>> Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
>>> *> 10.0.0.0/24 150.1.1.1 0 100 ?
>>> *> 10.0.0.0/16 150.1.1.1 0 100 200
i
>>> *> 11.0.0.0/16 150.1.1.1 0 100 200
i
>>> *> 12.0.0.0/16 150.1.1.1 0 100 200
i
>>> *> 13.0.0.0/16 150.1.1.1 0 100 200
i
>>>
>>> It seems when I used the aggregate address to originate the 10.0.0.0
>>> and 11.0.0.0 subnets I was able to inject more specific subnets from
>>> both blocks. Just trying to get this straight. Thoughts are
>>>
>> appreciated.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Nick Griffin
>>>
>>
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 01 2006 - 11:41:58 GMT-3