RE: Static Routes with interface or not

Steve,

Thanks for your response. Your reference did help a bit but I still have a
confusion. My problem has to do with when should a static route be
advertised into BGP.

I have a specific problem here. I found this while doing an INE MPLS lab.
My basic configuration is as follows:

ip vrf VPN_A
 rd 100:1
 route-target both 100:1

router bgp 100
no bgp default ipv4-unicast
neighbor 150.1.4.4 remote-as 100
neighbor 150.1.4.4 update-source loopback 0
address-family vpnv4 unicast
neighbor 150.1.4.4 activate
neighbor 150.1.4.4 send-community extended
address-family ipv4 vrf VPN_A
 redistribute connected
 redistribute static

ip route vrf VPN_A 192.168.7.0 255.255.255.0 Gig 0/0.1 155.1.76.7

As you can see I'm redistributing static and connect. Now on 12.4.(24)T the
route no being advertised to my BGP peers:

Rack1R6#show bgp vpnv4 unicast all 192.168.7.0
BGP routing table entry for 100:1:192.168.7.0/24, version 3
Paths: (1 available, no best path)
  Not advertised to any peer
  Local
    155.1.76.7 (inaccessible) from 0.0.0.0 (150.1.6.6)
      Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 100, weight 32768, valid,
sourced
      Extended Community: RT:100:1

But on 12.4.(24)T5 the route is being advertised to my BGP peers:

Rack1R6#show bgp vpnv4 unicast all 192.168.7.0
BGP routing table entry for 100:1:192.168.7.0/24, version 10
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table VPN_A)
Flag: 0x820
  Advertised to update-groups:
        1
  Local
    0.0.0.0 from 0.0.0.0 (150.1.6.6)
      Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 100, weight 32768, valid,
sourced, best
      Extended Community: RT:100:1
      mpls labels in/out 22/nolabel

As you can see 12.4.(24)T is acting different then 12.4.(24)T5. I should
also say that 155.1.76.7 is not reachable but Gig 0/0 is up/up.

So now I'm left with the question which IOS is correctly handling the issue.

    #1) What defines if a static route should be advertised out into BGP?
Which IOS is doing the correct job.
    #2) Where do I find this type of information on the DocCD?

Andy

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Steve Di Bias
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 3:38 PM
To: Andrew LaPorte
Cc: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Static Routes with interface or not

I know you are using VRF's here, but this doc should help in regards to your
question.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a00800ef7b2
.shtml

<http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a00800ef7b
2.shtml>
HTH

On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 12:02 PM, Andrew LaPorte <andy_at_cloud9.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I'm hoping that someone can help me understand the difference between
> the
> following:
>
> ip route vrf VPN_A 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 GigabitEthernet0/0
> 1.1.1.1
>
> and
>
> ip route vrf VPN_A 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 1.1.1.1
>
> I've tried looking at the MPLS doc section for static routing but it
> just made my head spin.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andy
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _ Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
-Steve Di Bias
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net