Re: bgp conditional route advertisement

From: Tony Singh <mothafungla_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:08:49 +0100

Thanks Brian nice trick

--
BR
Sent from my iPhone on 3
On 18 Sep 2013, at 17:24, Brian McGahan <bmcgahan_at_ine.com> wrote:
> I don't think changing the scanner is going to help you because the update/withdrawl process it event driven now, it doesn't use the scanner anymore.  What you may be able to do is to introduce an additional delay through object tracking though.  
> 
> Something like this:
> 
> track 1 ip route 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255 reachability
> delay up 60
> !
> ip route 3.3.3.3 255.255.255.255 1.1.1.1 track 1
> 
> This way if 1.1.1.1 is learned before 2.2.2.2, it still waits an additional 60 seconds before 1.1.1.1 is a valid condition to install 3.3.3.3 in the routing table.
> 
> 
> 
> HTH,
> 
> Brian McGahan, 4 x CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP/SC/DC), CCDE #2013::13
> bmcgahan_at_INE.com
>  
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.INE.com
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of BALAKRISHNAN Balaji
> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:12 PM
> To: Tony Singh; Narbik Kocharians
> Cc: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: bgp conditional route advertisement
> 
> Tony,
> Narbik,
> 
> Thanx for your comments..
> This is a production issue that I am facing.. There is no OSPF here... The
> router learns the routes ( 1.1.1.1 and 2.2.2.2) from the directly connected
> ibgp  peer and conditionally announces 3.3.3.3 to its ebgp peers.. Though the
> route being withdrawn immediately, the update is already getting propagated to
> rest of the network which is causing undesirable issues..
> Is there anyway, we can introduce a delay in triggering conditional
> announcement ( giving enough time for bgp table to converge).. I tried to play
> around with bgp scan timer but it did not help.
> 
> Thanx for your help again..
> 
> Rgds
> Bala.
> 
> 
> From: Tony Singh [mailto:mothafungla_at_gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 3:12 PM
> To: Narbik Kocharians
> Cc: BALAKRISHNAN Balaji; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: bgp conditional route advertisement
> 
> Good point, will lab up when I get a chance - cheers Narbik
> --
> BR
> 
> Tony
> 
> Sent from my iPhone on 3
> 
> On 16 Sep 2013, at 19:38, Narbik Kocharians
> <narbikk_at_gmail.com<mailto:narbikk_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
> Thanks Tony,
> 
> I have not labbed this up but just a thought and I could be wrong..... what if
> OSPF is advertising the route to BGP and this is how BGP router knows the
> route and this is why it advertises the route, and if we configure "max-metric
> router-lsa wait-for-bgp" on the OSPF router advertising the route, this will
> configure the router to advertise a maximum metric until BGP routing tables
> has converged, I believe it will wait for 10 minutes. It may work but it needs
> to be labbed up. Thinking out loud......
> 
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Tony Singh
> <mothafungla_at_gmail.com<mailto:mothafungla_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> Thanks Narbik nice and clear, I think the reservation that Balaji has it that
> when the bgp process resets it causes host route 3.3.3.3 to be advertised
> prior to bgp receiving all networks into its rib to me this is an order of ops
> where bgp rib will install host route to 1.1.1.1 into global and not yet
> learning the 2.2.2.2 route.
> 
> Balaji if you're testing I'd imagine not much traffic being forwarded to the
> 3.3.3.3 network prior to the route being withdrawn.
> 
> The answer is this is just the way the feature works.
> 
> --
> BR
> 
> Tony
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On 16 Sep 2013, at 18:47, Narbik Kocharians
> <narbikk_at_gmail.com<mailto:narbikk_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
> Have a look at this lab that I wrote, it might help you:
> 
> http://micronics.nl/BGP-Conditional-Adv.pdf
> 
> On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:12 AM, Tony Singh
> <mothafungla_at_gmail.com<mailto:mothafungla_at_gmail.com>> wrote:
> Hi Balaji
> 
> This is a good question one which I have been scratching my head over, can you
> confirm if this is in your production environment or is it on gns/IOU or home
> lab if so please confirm platform/IOS version
> 
> --
> BR
> 
> Tony
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On 4 Sep 2013, at 14:58, BALAKRISHNAN Balaji
> <Balaji.BALAKRISHNAN_at_swift.com<mailto:Balaji.BALAKRISHNAN_at_swift.com>> wrote:
> 
>> All,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Any suggestion ?.. Configuration is as below
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ip route 3.3.3.3 255.255.255.255 1.1.1.1
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Router bgp 65000
>> 
>> Network 3.3.3.3 mask 255.255.255.255
>> 
>> neighbour 192.168.1.1 remote-as 65001
>> 
>> neighbour 192.168.1.1 advertise-map  ADVERTISE   non-exist-map  NONEXIST
>> 
>> !
>> 
>> Route-map ADVERTISE   permit 10
>> 
>> Match ip address 50
>> 
>> !
>> 
>> Access-list 50 permit 3.3.3.3
>> 
>> !
>> 
>> Route-map NONEXIST permit 10
>> 
>> Match ip address 30
>> 
>> !
>> 
>> Access-list 30 permit 2.2.2.2
>> 
>> !
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanx
>> 
>> Balaji
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: BALAKRISHNAN Balaji
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 5:31 PM
>> To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>> Subject: bgp conditional route advertisement
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hello all,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I have a scenario that I am struggling to address a specific issue and
> would
>> like to hear your recommendation
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Announce the route 3.3.3.3 to the bgp neighbour only under the following
>> condition on the routes it receives from the backbone
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -           Only if it  has valid 1.1.1.1/32<http://1.1.1.1/32> route on the
> bgp table but no
>> valid route for 2.2.2.2/32<http://2.2.2.2/32>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> It works fine under the normal situation when both 1.1.1.1 and 2.2.2.2
> exist
>> in the bgp table ( meaning conditional route does not get triggered) .  But
>> when the router bounces its bgp connection to the backbone, it  learns the
>> route 1.1.1.1/32<http://1.1.1.1/32>  fraction of a second earlier than
> 2.2.2.2/32<http://2.2.2.2/32>..    It causes
>> the conditional advertisement to  kick in momentarily before withdrawing
>> immediately after which is causing some undesirable instability in the
>> network..  Can you recommend any work around to resolve this issue.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Rgds
>> 
>> Balaji
>> 
>> 
>> 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
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Narbik Kocharians
> CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
> www.MicronicsTraining.com<http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
> Sr. Technical Instructor
> YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
> A Cisco Learning Partner
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Narbik Kocharians
> CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
> www.MicronicsTraining.com<http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
> Sr. Technical Instructor
> YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
> A Cisco Learning Partner
> 
> 
> 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 Sep 20 2013 - 16:08:49 ART

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 01 2013 - 06:36:35 ART