Has the Redistribute/Distribute List command changed??

Unanswered Question
Nov 4th, 2008

"Distribute List out protocol..." used to only apply to routes that were in the IP table via that protocol. I now have a situation where a route that is not in the ip table via that redistributed protocol is getting redistributed. The connected route below appears in EIGRP from the OSPF redistribution. I realize connected routes are redistributed into OSPF too, but that still get that connected route into EIGRP. It's been a while since I looked at routing.... has something changed?? Here's the config:

router eigrp 101

redistribute ospf 10

network 172.16.1.0 0.0.0.255

default-metric 10 10 255 1 1492

distribute-list 5 out ospf 10

distribute-list 10 in

no auto-summary

!

router ospf 10

router-id 167.74.97.130

log-adjacency-changes

redistribute connected metric-type 1 subnets

redistribute eigrp 101 metric-type 1 subnets

network 10.74.97.128 0.0.0.63 area 97

network 10.74.254.0 0.0.0.255 area 97

distribute-list 10 out eigrp 101

distribute-list 15 in

access-list 5 deny 10.74.126.128 0.0.0.63

access-list 5 permit 10.74.96.0 0.0.31.255

access-list 5 permit 10.74.128.0 0.0.7.255

C 10.74.97.128/26 is directly connected, FastEthernet0

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Richard Burts Tue, 11/04/2008 - 13:57

Neil

I suspect that there is more going on than we see in your post. As a next step in figuring it out would you post the output of show ip eigrp topology 10.74.97.128 255.255.255.192

That will tell us more about how the route got into EIGRP.

HTH

Rick

bcnetadmin Wed, 11/05/2008 - 07:26

Hi Rick,

I investigated that a bit already. If you remove the redistribute connected from OSPF, the route still shows up in the EIGRP domain; however if you remove the network x.x.x.x statement in OSPF the route disappears. So it seems it's getting into the ospf table from the network statement and then getting redistributed into eigrp even though it's not an ospf route in the ip table (again, in my past experience the route had to be in the IP table first to get redistributed, but doesn't seem to be the case here). Here is the output of the sh eigrp topology command run on that router:

Router2#sh ip eigrp topology 10.74.97.128 255.255.255.192

IP-EIGRP (AS 101): Topology entry for 10.74.97.128/26

State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 1 Successor(s), FD is 256002560

Routing Descriptor Blocks:

0.0.0.0, from Redistributed, Send flag is 0x0

Composite metric is (256002560/0), Route is External

Vector metric:

Minimum bandwidth is 10 Kbit

Total delay is 100 microseconds

Reliability is 255/255

Load is 1/255

Minimum MTU is 1492

Hop count is 0

External data:

Originating router is 172.16.1.1 (this system)

AS number of route is 10

External protocol is OSPF, external metric is 0

Administrator tag is 0 (0x00000000)

Thanks

Neil

Richard Burts Wed, 11/05/2008 - 09:19

Neil

Thanks for posting the EIGRP topology information. It does clearly show that EIGRP is learning the route via redistribution of OSPF. That is a surprise to me because my experience was like yours that redistribution of OSPF into EIGRP would redistribute routes in the local routing table that were "O" routes but not the connected routes that were redistributed into OSPF.

Since your OSPF configuration had both redistriute connected and a network statement that matches the subnet it does make sense that OSPF would use the matching network statement in preference to the redistributed route. The redistributed route produces an OSPF external route while the network statement produces an OSPF intra-area route. And OSPF always prefers an intra-area route over an external route.

HTH

Rick

Actions

This Discussion