08-03-2007 09:28 PM - edited 03-03-2019 06:10 PM
Hi, forum
Based on the following link:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1829/products_feature_guide09186a008056c866.html
I was doing a lab test for this new feature. The lab senario is very simple, R1 send 10.1.1.0/24 to R2, R2 will conditional injects 10.1.1.0/25 and 10.1.1.128/25 to the BGP table. Unfortunately, I failed to make this happen. Below is the show ip bgp command output:
r2#sh ip bgp 10.1.1.0
BGP routing table entry for 10.1.1.0/24, version 2
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table)
Not advertised to any peer
100
10.0.0.1 from 10.0.0.1 (10.2.1.1)
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, best
r2#
r2#
r2#
r2#sh ip bgp inj
r2#sh ip bgp injected-paths
r2#
As you can see, there is no routes to be injected which should be there. I 've tried it over and over but no luck. Could anybody help me figure out this issue. What have I missed?
Attached is the configuration of r1 and r2.
Thanks for your helps.
SSLIN
Solved! Go to Solution.
08-04-2007 07:25 AM
SSLIN,
The issue is with the ROUTE_SOURCE prefix-list. You are matching against the BGP RID, when the route source should be the BGP next hop (10.0.0.1). Just change the prefix-list and it should work.
Hope this helps,
08-04-2007 04:58 AM
Can you post the output of sh ip bgp on R2 & R1
Narayan
08-07-2007 04:42 AM
Hi, Narayan
Thanks for your reply.Problem has been solved by using Harold's method. If you are still interering in seeing the show ip bgp output, please let me know.
Best Regards
SSLIN
08-04-2007 07:25 AM
SSLIN,
The issue is with the ROUTE_SOURCE prefix-list. You are matching against the BGP RID, when the route source should be the BGP next hop (10.0.0.1). Just change the prefix-list and it should work.
Hope this helps,
08-07-2007 04:32 AM
Hi, Narayan,HAROLD,Pavlo
Thanks for all the replies to my question. Problem have been solved by using Harold's method. Besides that,I have to add another peer to R2 so that the injeted routes have a way to advertise out.
Harold, do you agree that the link
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1829/products_feature_guide09186a008056c866.html
is kind of misleading? It's the link says using 10.1.2.1/32 for route source and it looks just like a loopback address to me. And also, if there is a diagram on this link, it would be easier for us to correctly set up a lab senario and quickly verified this BGP feature. Thanks for you help.
Best Regards
SSLIN
08-07-2007 05:24 AM
SSLIN,
I agree that the example provided in this document is not very clear. I will work with the documentation team to rectify this situation.
Thanks for the comment,
08-06-2007 10:18 AM
I agree with Harold.
Also, i had bad experience using PREFIX lists to match route-source. Try using standard ACL instead.
like:
access-list 10 permit host 10.0.0.1
route-map LEARNED_PATH permit 10
no match ip route-source
match ip route-source 10
08-07-2007 04:39 AM
Hi, pavlo
Thanks for your interesting suggestion, but prefix-list is not an issues for this case.
Thank you
SSLIN
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: