From: Xiaobo Zhu (xiaobo@zhu.net)
Date: Tue Dec 30 2008 - 11:00:37 ARST
Problem solved and many thanks!
I just typed network 2.2.2.0 but missed the mask. :(
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Piotr M <pitt2k@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you sure you advertise those loopbacks with the correct mask:
> network 2.2.2.0 mask 255.255.255.0
>
> PM
>
> 2008/12/30 Xiaobo Zhu <xiaobo@zhu.net>:
> > Hi,
> > Here in this scenario
> > R1-------192.168.13.0/24-----------R3
> > | |
> > 192.168.12.0/24 192.168.34.0/24
> > | |
> > R2--------192.168.24.0/24----------R4
> > | |
> > 2.2.2.2/24(loopback0) <http://2.2.2.2/24%28loopback0%29>
> 4.4.4.4(loopback0)
> > All links except the two loopback interface is in the same EIGRP domain.
> > R1 and R2 are in BGP AS 12, R3 and R4 are in BGP AS 34. R1 is peerd with
> R2
> > and R3, R4 is peered with R2, all neighbors are specified with the ip
> > address of physical interface.
> > Both R2 and R4 is configured to advertise their loopback interface to the
> > BGP domain, with the command network 2.2.2.0 and 4.4.4.0 respectivly.
> > And here comes the question, when I issue the
> > #show ip bgp summary
> > comand, every router seems to can establish neighbor relationship just
> as
> > I've expected.
> > but I get nothing when issue the command
> > # show ip bgp
> > So what is the problem?
> > Thanks in advance!
> > All the best for the coming new year!
> > Cheers, Xiaobo
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:10 ARST