Re: mpls vpn route-target

Remember:
- "both" = import + export
- every "export" statement produce an additive RT community. Prefix of VPNB
context will be advertised in mbgp with RT 1:600 + RT 1:105

still confused?
mirco.

On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Bryan Bartik <bbartik_at_ipexpert.com> wrote:

> Because R3 is already importing 1:105.
>
> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Ivan <ivanzghr_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes, if I put import also on R3 it works. But now I'm confused how
> > come that it works when you just put this on R4 (like solution of the
> > task specifies):
> >
> > ip vrf VPNB
> > route-target both 1:105
> >
> > ??
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Bryan Bartik <bbartik_at_ipexpert.com>
> wrote:
> > > Ivan,
> > >
> > > Yes definitely, R3 needs the import statement. VRFs are really locally
> > > significant. The only thing that allows them to communicate is the use
> of
> > > RTs.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Ivan <ivanzghr_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> R1 is getting updates from other side, which means it is configured
> > >> correctly:
> > >>
> > >> R1#sh ip ro
> > >> Gateway of last resort is not set
> > >>
> > >> C 1.0.0.0/8 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > >> D 5.0.0.0/8 [90/2809856] via 10.1.13.3, 01:03:54, Serial0/1/1
> > >> 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets
> > >> C 10.1.13.0 is directly connected, Serial0/1/1
> > >> D 10.1.45.0 [90/2681856] via 10.1.13.3, 01:03:54, Serial0/1/1
> > >> C 192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/1
> > >>
> > >> R5 is getting updates from R1 and exported routes from VPNB (R6):
> > >> R5#sh ip ro
> > >> Gateway of last resort is not set
> > >>
> > >> D 1.0.0.0/8 [90/2809856] via 10.1.45.4, 01:04:30, Serial0/0/0.54
> > >> C 5.0.0.0/8 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > >> D EX 6.0.0.0/8 [170/2560512256] via 10.1.45.4, 00:27:34,
> Serial0/0/0.54
> > >> C 192.168.5.0/24 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0
> > >> 10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
> > >> D 10.1.13.0/24 [90/2681856] via 10.1.45.4, 01:04:30,
> > Serial0/0/0.54
> > >> D 10.0.0.0/8 is a summary, 01:09:50, Null0
> > >> D EX 10.1.46.0/24 [170/2560512256] via 10.1.45.4, 00:32:19,
> > >> Serial0/0/0.54
> > >> C 10.1.45.0/24 is directly connected, Serial0/0/0.54
> > >>
> > >> R6 is getting routes from VPNA (EIGRP routes)
> > >>
> > >> R6#sh ip ro
> > >> Gateway of last resort is not set
> > >>
> > >> O E2 1.0.0.0/8 [110/2297856] via 10.1.46.4, 00:28:57, FastEthernet0/0
> > >> O E2 5.0.0.0/8 [110/2297856] via 10.1.46.4, 00:28:57, FastEthernet0/0
> > >> C 6.0.0.0/8 is directly connected, Loopback0
> > >> 10.0.0.0/24 is subnetted, 3 subnets
> > >> O E2 10.1.13.0 [110/1] via 10.1.46.4, 00:28:57, FastEthernet0/0
> > >> C 10.1.46.0 is directly connected, FastEthernet0/0
> > >> O E2 10.1.45.0 [110/1] via 10.1.46.4, 00:28:57, FastEthernet0/0
> > >>
> > >> Only R1 doesn't get VPNB's routes. Is it enought to configure rt
> > >> import only on one PE router which has defined vrf VPNA or on both PE
> > >> routers which have vrf VPNA. Now, router R3 doesn't have import
> > >> configured such as R4 has?
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Bryan Bartik <bbartik_at_ipexpert.com>
> > wrote:
> > >> > Ivan,
> > >> >
> > >> > Either way will work, just as long as routes that are exported with
> > the
> > >> > specific RT are being imported in the proper VRFs. Just take care
> that
> > >> > you
> > >> > don't allow reachability to sites that shouldn't have it (which
> > doesn't
> > >> > seem
> > >> > like the case here). Also make sure you have a metric when
> > >> > redistributing
> > >> > into EIGRP, you know the basics sometimes get skipped :)
> > >> >
> > >> > Other than that, post your PE configs and maybe we can spot
> > something...
> > >> >
> > >> > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Ivan <ivanzghr_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> P.S.
> > >> >> About topology (if someone receives mail and everything is moved
> :):
> > >> >> R6 is connected to PE R4...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 7:47 PM, Ivan <ivanzghr_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > OK. I have topology like this:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > R1 -- R3 -- R2 --R4 --R5
> > >> >> > |
> > >> >> > R6
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > R1 and R5 are pure customer routers in VPNA, and R6 is customer
> > >> >> > router
> > >> >> > in VPNB.
> > >> >> > R3 and R4 are PE routers and R2 is just P router.
> > >> >> > R1 and R5 are using EIGRP as routing protocol, and R6 is running
> > >> >> > OSPF.
> > >> >> > Everything is redistributed in MP-BGP and vice-versa for every
> VPN
> > >> >> > and
> > >> >> > working OK.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Task says that router R6 needs to participate in the same CUG as
> R1
> > >> >> > and
> > >> >> > R5.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > On R3 I have vrf:
> > >> >> > !
> > >> >> > ip vrf VPNA
> > >> >> > rd 1:20
> > >> >> > route-target export 1:105
> > >> >> > route-target import 1:105
> > >> >> > !
> > >> >> > on R4 vrf:
> > >> >> > !
> > >> >> > ip vrf VPNA
> > >> >> > rd 1:40
> > >> >> > route-target both 1:105
> > >> >> > !
> > >> >> > ip vrf VPNB
> > >> >> > rd 1:50
> > >> >> > route-target both 1:600
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > As I understand RTs, when you say route-target both in some vrf
> it
> > >> >> > means that all routes which has this ext BGP community will be
> > >> >> > exported from vrf into MP-BGP, and imported from MP-BGP into vrf,
> > >> >> > right?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Shouldn't next solution be enough for R1 and R5 to have VPNB's
> OSPF
> > >> >> > routes in its routing tables, and R6 to have VPNA's EIGRP routes
> in
> > >> >> > its routing table as OSPF E2 routes:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > ip vrf VPNA
> > >> >> > rd 1:20
> > >> >> > route-target export 1:105
> > >> >> > route-target import 1:105
> > >> >> > route-target import 1:600 (importing routes that were exported
> from
> > >> >> > vrf
> > >> >> > VPNB)
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > ip vrf VPNB
> > >> >> > rd 1:50
> > >> >> > route-target export 1:600
> > >> >> > route-target import 1:600
> > >> >> > route-target import 1:105 (importing routes that were exported
> > into
> > >> >> > MP-BGP from vrf VPNA)
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > ?? After this R6 has all VPNA's routes as E2 routes but R1
> doesn't
> > >> >> > have VPNB's routes as D EX routes ??
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Solution of the task says just this:
> > >> >> > ip vrf VPNB
> > >> >> > route-target both 1:105
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Some clarification please. Thanks
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > >> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> > >> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Bryan Bartik
> > >> > CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
> > >> > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
> > >> > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >>
> > >>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > >> Subscription information may be found at:
> > >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bryan Bartik
> > > CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
> > > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
> > > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Bryan Bartik
> CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
>
>
> 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
Received on Mon Nov 02 2009 - 22:24:28 ART