From: Shine Joseph (shinepjoseph@iprimus.com.au)
Date: Fri Mar 14 2008 - 05:25:04 ARST
Nagendra,
I think it's a kind of route filtering in the BB1. If distance eigrp 90 255
is configured in the BB1, I don't believe you can do much about it. But if
the route filtering is based on prefixes, you could manipulate on your route
advertisements by summarising it.
Dear experts, please speak up, if you have any comments.
Regards,
Shine
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
nagendra kumar
Sent: Friday, 14 March 2008 4:39 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Issue with redistribution
Hi All,
loopback
|
ospf
|
R1--EIGRP---------BB
|
|
ospf
|
R2
Sorry for the lenghty mail....
In the above setup, I am running EIGRP between R1 and BB and OSPF between
R1 and R2. Loopback interface of R1 is included in OSPF domain.
I am redistributing OSPF into EIGRP (using "redistribute ospf 1 metric
10000 1 255 10 1500" command) in a way that only the loopback interface of
R1 gets redistributed into EIGRP(I have other routers connected in OSPF
domain as well). I enabled EIGRP debugs and happen to see that R1 is
advertising the loopback address to BB via EIGRP, but I am not able to ping
BB with loopback address as source address. I removed "redistribute ospf 1
metric " command and tried "redistribue connected" and still end up with
same issue. I am aware that we need to mention the metric while
redistributing other protocols into EIGRP and I am done with that as well
I tried adding the loopback address into EIGRP (using network command
under eigrp process) and everything works fine. In other words, if the
address is advertised as internal route, I am able to reach BB with
loopback address as source. But If the same is advertised as external, I am
not able to.
This is a kind of mock lab which we took internally and we dont have
access to the BB router. I dont have the running configs to post here.
Sorry about it. Can some please let me know if this could be any
redistribution issue or any intentional config in BB router to have
external routes with Administrative distance as 255?.
The funny part is, I tried similar setup with same config in my setup
and it works fine with no issues. I dont have any ACL/security configured
in the link between R1 and BB routers.
If some one caught in such situation in real lab, what would be the best
way to troubleshoot?.
Lately, I have seen mails saying that In real labs, our configs may be
disturbed as part of troubleshooting. Is it true?. If so will they do it in
our routers/switches or in BB routers?.
If it wont violate the NDA, can some one please answer the above?.
Regards,
Nagendra
---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it
now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:53 ART