Default behaviour as far as I can tell.
It's better right?
Conserve bandwidth :) but an arse to figure out for the first time!
-- BR Tony > On 22 Jun 2014, at 22:07, kumar yes <2014ccie_at_gmail.com> wrote: > > Hell All, > > In my GNS3 LAB, I have enabled MP BGP to send L3 routes between Customer > router 1 and customer Router 2 using BGP as PE-CE Protocol. > > PEs running AS 100 running IOS-XR > CEs running AS 80 running IOS > > I also configured RPL with PASS statement under EBGP sessions both in and > out. > > THE issue is I donbt see that PEs advertising any routes that received from > the CE1 to CE2 and vise versa > > I know that the routes will be discarded on CE end if it receives prefix > from same AS (80) but in this case the PEs not advertising the routes to CE > but when I configure as override under EBGP neighbor on PEs then the PEs > started adveristing routes to CEs. > > I did the same on PEs running IOS and i see PEs adveriting routes to CEs > (without any additional configuration) and CE discarded the route as > expected. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show bgp vrf CUST1 neighbors 192.168.1.9 routes > Sun Jun 22 14:02:09.727 UTC > BGP VRF CUST1, state: Active > BGP Route Distinguisher: 1111:1111 > VRF ID: 0x60000002 > BGP router identifier 33.33.33.33, local AS number 100 > BGP table state: Active > Table ID: 0xe0000002 RD version: 105 > BGP main routing table version 105 > Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best > i - internal, r RIB-failure, S stale, N Nexthop-discard > Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete > Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path > Route Distinguisher: 1111:1111 (default for vrf CUST1) > *> 9.9.9.9/32 192.168.1.9 0 0 80 i > > ---------------------------------------------- > RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show bgp vrf CUST1 neighbors 172.168.2.5 advertised-routes > Sun Jun 22 14:01:44.099 UTC > > *RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show bgp vrf CUST1 neighbors 172.168.2.5* > Sun Jun 22 14:05:53.371 UTC > > BGP neighbor is 172.168.2.5, vrf CUST1 > Remote AS 80, local AS 100, external link > Remote router ID 5.5.5.5 > BGP state = Established, up for 01:37:05 > Last read 00:00:12, Last read before reset 00:00:00 > Hold time is 180, keepalive interval is 60 seconds > Configured hold time: 180, keepalive: 60, min acceptable hold time: 3 > Last write 00:00:00, attempted 19, written 19 > Second last write 00:01:00, attempted 19, written 19 > Last write before reset 00:00:00, attempted 0, written 0 > Second last write before reset 00:00:00, attempted 0, written 0 > Last write pulse rcvd Jun 22 14:05:41.332 last full not set pulse count > 223 > Last write pulse rcvd before reset 00:00:00 > Socket not armed for io, armed for read, armed for write > Last write thread event before reset 00:00:00, second last 00:00:00 > Last KA expiry before reset 00:00:00, second last 00:00:00 > Last KA error before reset 00:00:00, KA not sent 00:00:00 > Last KA start before reset 00:00:00, second last 00:00:00 > Precedence: internet > Enforcing first AS is enabled > Multi-protocol capability received > Neighbor capabilities: > Route refresh: advertised (old + new) and received (old + new) > 4-byte AS: advertised > Address family IPv4 Unicast: advertised and received > Received 118 messages, 0 notifications, 0 in queue > Sent 110 messages, 0 notifications, 0 in queue > Minimum time between advertisement runs is 0 secs > > For Address Family: IPv4 Unicast > BGP neighbor version 105 > Update group: 0.1 Filter-group: 0.4 No Refresh request being processed > Route refresh request: received 4, sent 4 > > * Policy for incoming advertisements is CUST1 Policy for outgoing > advertisements is CUST1* > 1 accepted prefixes, 1 are bestpaths > *Cumulative no. of prefixes denied: 0.* > Prefix advertised 8, suppressed 11, withdrawn 4 > Maximum prefixes allowed 1048576 > Threshold for warning message 75%, restart interval 0 min > My AS number is allowed 3 times in received updates > An EoR was not received during read-only mode > Last ack version 105, Last synced ack version 0 > Outstanding version objects: current 0, max 2 > Additional-paths operation: None > > > > > Is IOS-XR behaving right and needs special treatment here? > > > > > Thanks and appreciate your response > > > Is IOS-XR behaving right or does it need any special treatment here? > > Thanks and appreciate your response > > > 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.netReceived on Sun Jun 22 2014 - 22:14:29 ART
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jul 01 2014 - 06:32:36 ART