From: Bit Gossip (bit.gossip@chello.nl)
Date: Fri Sep 07 2007 - 16:50:05 ART
I am afraid there is a major problem with tag here:
interface Loopback1
ip address 9.9.9.9 255.255.255.255
!
interface Serial1/0
ip address 1.1.1.1 255.0.0.0
serial restart-delay 0
!
router rip
version 2
redistribute connected route-map R
network 1.0.0.0
!
route-map R permit 10
set tag 9
!
R1(config-router)#
*Sep 7 21:48:42.227: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Serial1/0
(1.1.1.1)
*Sep 7 21:48:42.227: RIP: build update entries
*Sep 7 21:48:42.227: 9.0.0.0/8 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
----- Original Message -----
From: "Antonio Soares" <amsoares@netcabo.pt>
To: "'Julio Carrasco'" <julio.carrasco@ya.com>; "'Bit Gossip'"
<bit.gossip@chello.nl>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: is IGP tag transitive
> It does support. Maybe you are hitting an IOS issue. Here my routers are
> running 12.3.20:
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> R2#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> Routing entry for 1.1.1.1/32
> Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 11, type intra area
> Redistributing via rip
> Advertised by rip metric 2 route-map ospf2rip
> Last update from 12.12.12.1 on Ethernet1/0, 00:01:56 ago
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> * 12.12.12.1, from 1.1.1.1, 00:01:56 ago, via Ethernet1/0
> Route metric is 11, traffic share count is 1
>
> R2#
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> R2#sh route-map
> route-map ospf2rip, permit, sequence 10
> Match clauses:
> Set clauses:
> tag 2
> Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes
> R2#
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> R3#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> Routing entry for 1.1.1.1/32
> Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 2
> Tag 2
> Redistributing via rip
> Last update from 23.23.23.2 on Ethernet0/1, 00:00:06 ago
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> * 23.23.23.2, from 23.23.23.2, 00:00:06 ago, via Ethernet0/1
> Route metric is 2, traffic share count is 1
>
> R3#
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Antonio Soares
> CCIE #18473, CCNP, CCIP
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Julio Carrasco
> Sent: sexta-feira, 7 de Setembro de 2007 18:36
> To: Bit Gossip; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: is IGP tag transitive
>
> Hi Bit,
>
> RIP do not support tags.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bit Gossip" <bit.gossip@chello.nl>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 6:39 PM
> Subject: is IGP tag transitive
>
>
>> Experts,
>> I was under the impression that if routing protocol A set a tag value on
>> a
>> certain prefix, when this prefix is redistributed into protocol B the tag
>> value is preserved.
>> My lab is showing instead that this is not true at least from OSPF to
>> RIP.
>> What is the real truth here?
>> Thanks,
>> bit.
>>
>> Routing entry for 204.12.3.0/24
>> Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20
>> Tag 125, type extern 2, forward metric 128
>> Redistributing via rip
>> Advertised by rip metric 1 route-map OR
>> Last update from 145.3.23.2 on Serial4/0.23, 00:08:00 ago
>> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>> * 145.3.23.2, from 150.3.5.5, 00:08:00 ago, via Serial4/0.23
>> Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
>> Route tag 125 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>>
>>
>> *Sep 7 16:44:46.833: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via
>> FastEthernet1/0
>> (145.3.36.3)
>> *Sep 7 16:44:46.833: RIP: build update entries
>> <....>
>>
>> *Sep 7 16:44:46.837: 204.12.3.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
>> <<<<<<<<<
>>
>> Rack3R3#
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> 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 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:10 ART