From: Brian McGahan (bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Wed Jan 03 2007 - 13:23:17 ART
You don't have a route to the next-hop values. You can tell
this from the "show ip bgp w.x.y.z" output where it shows the next-hop
and says inaccessible). Another indication of this is when you look at
the overall "show ip bgp" output you can see those prefixes are not best
routes. Best routes have the > sign in the status code on the left side
of the output. Look up the "bgp bestpath selection" process on CCO and
look at the first section on why BGP does not use a path as best.
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP)
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Dishan Gamage
> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:34 AM
> To: alexeim@orcsoftware.com
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: bgp table not showing routes on RR-clients
>
> Hi Alexei
>
> Does this give up any clue ??
>
>
> R4#sh ip bgp
> BGP table version is 2, local router ID is 110.90.4.4
> 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
> *> 9.9.9.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 i
> * i172.16.1.0/24 110.99.12.1 0 100 0 111 i
> * i172.16.2.0/24 110.99.12.1 0 100 0 111 i
> * i172.16.3.0/24 110.99.12.1 0 100 0 111 i
> * i172.16.4.0/24 110.99.12.1 0 100 0 111 i
> R4#sh ip bgp 172.16.1.0 ?
> A.B.C.D Network mask
> | Output modifiers
> <cr>
>
> R4#sh ip bgp 172.16.1.0
> BGP routing table entry for 172.16.1.0/24, version 0
> Paths: (1 available, no best path)
> Not advertised to any peer
> 111, (Received from a RR-client)
> 110.99.12.1 (inaccessible) from 110.90.2.2 (110.90.2.2)
> Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal
> R4#
>
> On 1/3/07, Alexei Monastyrnyi <alexeim@orcsoftware.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> > Could you check if R4 recognizes prefixes from R2 as valid.
> >
> > Yep, some show output would be handy to have.
> >
> > A.
> >
> > on 1/3/2007 3:02 PM Dishan Gamage wrote:
> > > Hi Group
> > >
> > > I hav followin config
> > >
> > > 1. R1(AS111) --------> R2(AS112)----> (ebgp)
> > >
> > > 2. R1 injects four loopback addresses..(172.16.1.0 - 172.16.4.0)
to
> BGP
> > >
> > > 3. R2 receives the four loopback address (sh ip bgp is ok!) (R2 is
a
> > > RR-client in AS112)
> > >
> > > 4. R4 which is the only RR in AS112 is also receiving the four
> loopback
> > id's
> > > (i.e R2, R5, R6 are clients in AS112)
> > >
> > > **** ---> my problem is that R5, and R6 are not receiving the
loopback
> > > address of R1. ?? (in the bgp table)
> > >
> > > but when i create a loopback on R4, it propages to R5, R6 no issue
> > ......
> > >
> > > all my bgp states are establish ...
> > >
> > > pls help
> > >
> > > cheers
> > > Dishan
> > >
> > >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Feb 08 2007 - 23:46:55 ART