Re: community VRF scenario

Np, I made the same mistake before.
On Jun 17, 2011 12:17 PM, "Persio Pucci" <persio_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Bingo!
>
> Thank you Fabian, it worked like a charm. Is this usally overlooked or is
it
> just me stupid? I thought I would just need it in the PE where I am mixing
> the VRFs...
>
> Regards
>
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Fabian Pucciarelli <fabiangp_at_gmail.com
>wrote:
>
>> Are you setting the rt in all the PEs or just one? You may need the
export
>> map and the keyword additive configured in all the devices exporting
routes.
>> On Jun 17, 2011 12:03 PM, "Persio Pucci" <persio_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Some more data here...
>> >
>> > I see it working (I see routes from one VRF into the other) but the
thing
>> is
>> > I only see SOME routes.
>> >
>> > This is the original VRF's ip route table (names and addresses have
been
>> > changed to protect the innocent)
>> >
>> > 10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
>> >> C 10.23.129.184/30 is directly connected, GigabitEthernet0.72
>> >> L 10.23.129.185/32 is directly connected, GigabitEthernet0.72
>> >> 17.62.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets
>> >> B 17.62.105.0 [20/0] via 10.23.129.186, 03:05:17
>> >> B 17.62.106.0 [20/0] via 10.23.129.186, 03:05:17
>> >> 172.17.0.0/28 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> >> B 172.17.0.32 [200/0] via 20.15.231.1, 03:05:17
>> >> 20.62.53.0/32 is subnetted, 2 subnets
>> >> B 20.62.53.61 [200/0] via 20.15.231.1, 03:05:17
>> >> B 20.62.53.62 [200/0] via 20.15.231.1, 03:05:17
>> >
>> >
>> > This is the destination VRF that was supposed to receive ALL routes:
>> >
>> > 17.62.0.0/24 is subnetted, 2 subnets
>> >> B 17.62.105.0 [20/0] via 10.23.129.186 (VRF_A), 03:07:11
>> >> B 17.62.106.0 [20/0] via 10.23.129.186 (VRF_A), 03:07:11
>> >
>> >
>> > I am using a export map route-map matching all the subnets (there are
>> hits
>> > to all of them) and setting the extcomm to a new RT that is being both
>> > exported at the source VRF and imported at the destination VRF, as we
can
>> > see here:
>> >
>> > sh ip bgp vpnv4 vrf VRF_B 17.62.105.0
>> >> BGP routing table entry for 1234:5555:17.62.105.0/24, version 534
>> >> Paths: (1 available, best #1, table VRF_B)
>> >> Not advertised to any peer
>> >> 5555, imported path from 1234:4444:17.62.105.0/24
>> >> 10.23.129.186 (via VRF_A) from 10.23.129.186 (10.23.128.14)
>> >> Origin incomplete, localpref 100, valid, external, best
>> >> Extended Community: RT:1234:4444 RT:1234:5555
>> >
>> >
>> > Why are the others not being inserted as well? I receive both 17.
subnets
>> > from one BGP peer on this router, while the others I receive from a
>> > different peer... nevermind the connected ones
>> >
>> > Persio
>> >
>> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Persio Pucci <persio_at_gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi guys,
>> >>
>> >> looking for some help creating a community VRF scenario where multiple
>> VRFs
>> >> will need to communicate to one common VRF. This common VRF will need
to
>> >> learn the routes from all the others VRF. In the other hand, I'll have
>> to
>> >> selectively export routes from the community VRF to each of the other
>> VRFs.
>> >>
>> >> I've been working some with import/export maps to no avail. Anybody
>> there
>> >> too bored to help? :)
>> >>
>> >> Persio
>> >
>> >
>> > 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 Fri Jun 17 2011 - 15:03:46 ART