From: Bit Gossip (bit.gossip@chello.nl)
Date: Fri Sep 07 2007 - 17:52:26 ART
I have done further more tests on
C3750 Software (C3750-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.2(25)SEE
and
(C2600-JK9S-M), Version 12.3(21)
and
7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.4(15)T1
and
C2600 Software (C2600-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.4(12)
When redistributing from OSPF into RIP the tag is lost and reset to 0 !!!
The simple test:
R2(config-router)#do show run | b router
router eigrp 100
redistribute ospf 1 metric 1 1 1 1 1
network 2.2.2.2 0.0.0.0
no auto-summary
router ospf 1
log-adjacency-changes
network 1.1.1.2 0.0.0.0 area 0
router rip
version 2
redistribute ospf 1 metric 1
network 2.0.0.0
R2(config-router)#do show ip route 9.9.9.9
Routing entry for 9.9.9.9/32
Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20
Tag 9, type extern 2, forward metric 64
Redistributing via eigrp 100, rip
Advertised by eigrp 100 metric 1 1 1 1 1
rip metric 1
Last update from 1.1.1.1 on Serial1/1, 00:03:57 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 1.1.1.1, from 9.9.9.9, 00:03:57 ago, via Serial1/1
Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
Route tag 9
R2(config-router)#
*Sep 7 22:48:30.963: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Serial1/0
(2.2.2.2)
*Sep 7 22:48:30.963: RIP: build update entries
*Sep 7 22:48:30.963: 1.0.0.0/8 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
*Sep 7 22:48:30.963: 9.0.0.0/8 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
Instead the same redistribution OSPF->EIGRP no problem.
This can have quite an impact when relying on tagging in mutual
redistribution scenarios
Please confirm, or better tell me that I am wrong !!!
Thanks,
bit.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bit Gossip" <bit.gossip@chello.nl>
To: "Antonio Soares" <amsoares@netcabo.pt>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: is IGP tag transitive
>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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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