I'm relatively new to VRF-Lite and need some help please.
I've implemented a vrf-lite config, edited config below contains the interesting bits.
Does anyone know if there are any issues between using 'rd1:1' with 'router eigrp 1', that may affect propogation of CUST_A's eigrp summary-routes?
CUST_B is distributing summary-routes successfully but CUST_A cannot (Both have routers directly connected to this router). There is a summary-route '172.17.64.0/18' on the neighbouring router. All other routes are fine, except any summary-routes. The FD for the CUST_A summary-route is seen as 4294967295 & hence 'Inaccessible'.
The only thing I can think of is if there is a reason, which I'm unaware of, that I shouldn't be using 'router eigrp 1' and rd1:1 for a customer. But I can't find anything that states so.
Cheers for any help
ip vrf CUST_A
ip vrf CUST_B
router eigrp 1
address-family ipv4 vrf CUST_B
network 10.0.0.0 0.0.0.7
network 10.0.0.16 0.0.0.7
address-family ipv4 vrf CUST_A
network 10.91.0.0 0.0.0.3
network 220.127.116.11 0.0.0.3
You get the same behavior with or without VRF. If the prefix cannot be installed in the RIB, EIGRP sets the FD to inaccessible and therefore doesn't propagate it to any neighbors.
To fix the issue just remove the static from the specific VRF.
Hope this helps,