OT - BGP command output interpretation

From: <Charles.Henson_at_regions.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:59:23 -0500

Well... kinda OT..... So I'm troubleshooting some BGP and putting my study
skills to good work and having a bit of an issue.

PROBLEM:
        Router has no 0/0 route. Router is supposed to get 0/0 from BGP peer.
Then OSPF on same router (via default information originate) will feed it
on to WAN. No "always" applied to OSPF Default information originate
statement.

x.x.x.y is my upstream provider. z.z.z.z is my IBGP peer for redundancy. I
see that it is not feeding me any prefixes. Normally I have 1 prefix (the
0/0 route) and that is all I need. So the way I'm reading the below
statement, it looks to me like I'm not being fed any route(s). So if that
is the case than the below output looks logical and I need to go yell at my
carrier.
###############################################################################################
ROUTER-1#show ip bgp summ
BGP router identifier x.x.x.x, local AS number 9999
BGP table version is 38, main routing table version 38
5 network entries using 585 bytes of memory
9 path entries using 468 bytes of memory
6/2 BGP path/bestpath attribute entries using 744 bytes of memory
1 BGP AS-PATH entries using 24 bytes of memory
0 BGP route-map cache entries using 0 bytes of memory
0 BGP filter-list cache entries using 0 bytes of memory
BGP using 1821 total bytes of memory
1 received paths for inbound soft reconfiguration
BGP activity 9/4 prefixes, 42/33 paths, scan interval 60 secs

Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down
State/PfxRcd
x.x.x.y 4 1234 137818 137857 38 0 0 01:52:26 0
z.z.z.z 4 9999 137867 137858 38 0 0 00:01:14 4

ROUTER-1#show ip bgp
BGP table version is 38, local router ID is x.x.x.x
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i -
internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete

[NO 0/0 ROUTE. NOTHING TO SEE HERE. MOVE ALONG]
   Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path

###############################################################################################

BUT WAIT. WHAT IS THIS?

If I hit up my specific neighbor for received routes then BGP reports that
it has a 0/0 route from his peer. It's total prefix count is 1. Met and
local pref 0. That all looks good. The route is valid. But it is not
flagged as "best".
################################################################################################
ROUTER-1#show ip bgp neighbors x.x.x.y received-routes
BGP table version is 38, local router ID is x.x.x.x
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i -
internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete

   Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
* 0.0.0.0 x.x.x.y 0 0 1234 i

Total number of prefixes 1
################################################################################################

So my BGP summary commands sho zero prefixes being received by me. But my
neighbor specific command shows the 0/0 being received and the prefixes
totalling 1. This is my problem. The 0/0 route appears there but it's not
getting passed to the RIB. Now I have no other static or dynamic 0/0 routes
or anything else with a lower AD. I have no RIB failures.

1. Am I understanding the command output above correctly? I believe that I
am based on CCO and checking with my local Cisco guy. He's nosing around as
well but feels that something is amiss here.

2. If I (we) are interpreting the command output above correctly, then does
the conflict between the commands make sense? Any thoughts?

I have bounced the router and still have the same issue. To bring things up
I have added a static to to see if that would work. It did. So the next hop
is valid. Anyone?

[IP addressing and ASNs have been changed to protect the innocent. Yes, I
am aware that some creative googling will reveal all anyway.]

Charles Henson

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Mar 15 2010 - 14:59:23 ART

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Apr 01 2010 - 07:26:35 ART