02-06-2008 09:16 AM - edited 03-03-2019 08:35 PM
I have a question regarding running BGP on a router with two VRF's:
Here is my config:
!
router bgp xxxxx
no synchronization
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network x.x.x.x mask 255.255.255.x
network x.x.x.x mask 255.255.255.x
network x.x.x.x mask 255.255.255.x
neighbor x.x.x.x remote-as xxxxx
no auto-summary
!
address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-2
redistribute connected
redistribute static
neighbor y.y.y.y remote-as xxxxx
neighbor y.y.y.y activate
no synchronization
exit-address-family
!
This works fine but now I need to add the following lines to the Global-VRF:
neighbor x.x.x.x prefix-list ROUTES_ALLOWED_IN in
neighbor x.x.x.x route-map PREPEND_RM out
When I do this the changes apply to the Global-VRF and VRF-2.
Should the Global-VRF be in it's own address-family? I think this would work but wanted to run it by you folks since this is my first deployment of VRF's and BGP.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
02-12-2008 01:43 PM
I'm not sure the behavior you are seeing. I applied your configuration here and it remained in the global portion of the BGP configuration. It didn't duplicate the command into the VRF-2.
What exactly are you seeing in your config?
Also, you only have one VRF, the global routing table isn't considered a VRF.
__
Edison.
02-12-2008 02:07 PM
Thank you for your reply Edison. The problem I was having with the prefix-list and route-map in the global bgp configuration was that it was filtering routes in VRF-2. I have since created a second VRF and configured it as below to get it to work. I am hoping tomorrow to set up the previous config in my lab tomorrow and play around with it.
router bgp xxxxx
no synchronization
bgp router-id xxx.xxx.58.150
bgp log-neighbor-changes
no auto-summary
!
address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-1
redistribute connected
redistribute static
neighbor xxx.xxx.242.169 remote-as xxxxx
neighbor xxx.xxx.242.169 activate
no synchronization
exit-address-family
!
address-family ipv4 vrf Local
neighbor xxx.xxx.249.205 remote-as xxxxx
neighbor xxx.xxx.249.205 activate
neighbor xxx.xxx.249.205 prefix-list ROUTES_ALLOWED_IN in
neighbor xxx.xxx.249.205 route-map PREPEND_RM out
no synchronization
network xxx.xxx.58.150 mask 255.255.255.255
network xxx.xxx.58.151 mask 255.255.255.255
network xxx.xxx.129.0 mask 255.255.255.0
network xxx.xxx.129.32 mask 255.255.255.240
exit-address-family
02-12-2008 02:37 PM
Good luck and let us know.
__
Edison.
02-14-2008 02:25 PM
Well now that I have this setup in a lab environment it works fine. You were right Edison. There must have been something that I was overlooking when this was in production. Thanks for looking into this and sorry for wasting your time.
02-14-2008 02:56 PM
Hi,
just One note:
The Global IPV4 Bgp table is differ from the BGP VPNv4 table.
If you want to apply any Route filtering method you should know where u want it to be applied. As usually Normal BGP IPv4 carried out Between the PE-CE, And VPNv4 is carried out between PE-PE.
HTH
Mohamed
02-26-2008 10:39 AM
I agree Mohamed and thank you for your reply. But in this case the provider terminated two VRFs to me via one T3 seperated by DLCIs so I had to use BGP IPv4 and VPNv4 on the CE.
02-26-2008 11:34 AM
Hi Adam,
Ok, so you are having Internet Service along with a VPN through the same MPLS-VPN Backbone provider.
Configuring per vrf instance on the bgp process shouldnt affect your Global BGP IPv4 config at all, pls double check and update.
HTH
Mohamed
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide