Solved: Is this back out plan statement wrong? (ospf redistribution)

news2010a · ‎04-28-2009

For example, imagine the following configuration to add a specific aggregate-address:

router bgp 1000

address-family ipv4 vrf MYTEST

redistribute ospf 1 vrf MYTEST route-map OSPF1_REDISTR

aggregate-address 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only

no auto-summary

!

end

wri mem

Then Documented roll-back plan is below. I think the line marked below is incorrect?

router bgp 1000

address-family ipv4 vrf MYTEST

redistribute ospf 1 vrf MYTEST match internal external 1 external 2 <<<<<======Wrong?

no aggregate-address 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only

exit

!

end

wri mem

Giuseppe Larosa · ‎04-28-2009

Hello Marlon,

if the objective of the rollback action is only to remove the aggregate address the rollback can be:

router bgp 1000

address-family ipv4 vrf MYTEST

no aggregate-address 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only

if the rollback action includes the removal of the redistribute statement I would the following:

router bgp 1000

address-family ipv4 vrf MYTEST

no aggregate-address 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only

no redistribute ospf 1 vrf MYTEST route-map OSPF1_REDISTR

+

no redistribute ospf 1 vrf MYTEST

the reason for this is that I've seen that removing a redistribute ... route-map creates an entry without the route-map so it is better to remove twice.

About the suggested rollback:

this depends on what is the objective and on how the route-map is defined.

Hope to help

Giuseppe

View solution in original post

Giuseppe Larosa · ‎04-28-2009

Hello Marlon,

if the objective of the rollback action is only to remove the aggregate address the rollback can be:

router bgp 1000

address-family ipv4 vrf MYTEST

no aggregate-address 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only

if the rollback action includes the removal of the redistribute statement I would the following:

router bgp 1000

address-family ipv4 vrf MYTEST

no aggregate-address 1.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 summary-only

no redistribute ospf 1 vrf MYTEST route-map OSPF1_REDISTR

+

no redistribute ospf 1 vrf MYTEST

the reason for this is that I've seen that removing a redistribute ... route-map creates an entry without the route-map so it is better to remove twice.

About the suggested rollback:

this depends on what is the objective and on how the route-map is defined.

Hope to help

Giuseppe

news2010a · ‎04-28-2009

The latter is exactly what I wanted. That makes sense.