From: Ryan Morris (ryan@egate.net)
Date: Wed Mar 05 2008 - 20:15:38 ARST
Joe & Scott (V):
Those are both elegant and spectacular solutions! I haven't used the
event manager since I was studying back in September... how soon we
forget. Not sure if I have ethernet ports available for Scott's solution
but I'll definitely try these out.
Thanks guys,
Ryan Morris
CCIE #18953
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Joseph Brunner wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> Just run a very recent 12.4 (you don't need T train) and you can make this
> eigrp summary conditional. Here's my router with your solution
>
> logging buffered 8192
> logging on
>
> router eigrp 1
> network 166.16.1.1 0.0.0.0
> network 166.16.254.254 0.0.0.0
> network 201.1.11.11 0.0.0.0
> no auto-summary
>
> interface loop1
> ip address 166.16.254.254 255.255.255.255
>
> inteface f0/1
> ip address 166.16.1.1 255.255.255.0
>
>
> track 20 interface f0/0 line-protocol
>
>
> event manager applet track1
> event syslog pattern "%TRACKING-5-STATE: 20 rtr 20 state Up->Down"
> action 1.0 cli command "enable"
> action 1.1 cli command "configure terminal"
> action 1.2 cli command "interface loop1"
> action 1.3 cli command "shutdown"
> !
>
> interface f0/0
> ip address 201.1.11.11 255.255.255.0
> ip summary address-eigrp 1 166.16.0.0 255.255.0.0
>
>
>
> You will need to enable the loop1 yourself later, or write another applet to
> bring it back up
>
> event manager applet track2
> event syslog pattern "%TRACKING-5-STATE: 20 rtr 20 state Down->Up"
> action 1.0 cli command "enable"
> action 1.1 cli command "configure terminal"
> action 1.2 cli command "interface loop1"
> action 1.3 cli command "no shutdown"
> !
>
>
> -Joe
> #19366
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Ryan
> Morris
> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 1:43 PM
> To: Jason Madsen
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Summarised Backup Network problem
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> A good idea, but there's no hsrp in this picture. The links between the
> WAN routers and the switches are all routed (and they need to be point to
> point to accomodate some inline devices we use to accelerate traffic).
>
> I've been trying to find another feature that uses the track command to
> shutdown an interface, but so far no luck.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ryan Morris
> CCIE #18953
>
>
> On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Jason Madsen wrote:
>
> > a link referencing what I mentioned earlier:
> >
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3560/software/release/1
> 2.2_44_se/configuration/guide/sweot.html#wp1084432
> >
> > more specifically, the "*track ip route reachability*" command, which is
> > just below the area that the link will take you to.
> >
> > Jason
> > On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Ryan Morris <ryan@egate.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Here's a scenario I've run into in real life:
> > >
> > > We have a branch office with two WAN connections, primary and backup.
> > > Traffic will only take the backup link if the primary is not available.
> > > We run EIGRP between these routers and our data centre routers. I'm
> > > planning to summarise the routes coming out of these branch routers in
> > > order to simplify my routing table. Per best practice, there is a
> > > loopback address in each of the branch routers that is in the netblock
> > > for that office.
> > >
> > > Inside the branch office, there is a group of core switches made up of
> two
> > > 3550s. Each 3550 connects to one of the WAN routers, and has an EIGRP
> > > relationship with the other 3550 and the connected router.
> > >
> > > So if the primary WAN link or the primary router fails, no problem.
> > > Traffic routes to the backup.
> > >
> > > Problem: if the connection between the primary router and the 3550
> fails
> > > (or, let's say the switch dies), that router will continue to advertise
> > > the summary because of the loopback, and because it has a better
> > > metric than the backup, traffic will not fail over to the backup.
> > >
> > > Any ideas on how to solve this? i.e. a feature that shuts down an
> > > interface or explicitly stops advertising a route if another interface
> > > fails? Or is the the simple answer (take the loopback off the primary
> > > router) the only way to keep this from happening?
> > >
> > > Input appreciated!
> > >
> > > Ryan Morris
> > > CCIE #18953
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > 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 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:52 ART