BGP Logs not getting reflected on Intrested (Still not clear)

Unanswered Question
Dec 21st, 2009

Hi all,

i have pasted the same question couple of months back(https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/209549) today came across below situation. BGP was down for 9 Mints but those flaps did not reflect on interface...Still the concept is not clear. Kindly help to get out  from where I have struck up...





XX-PE-XX#s int Mu71
Multilink71 is up, line protocol is up
  Hardware is multilink group interface
  Description: ***** XXXXXX****
  Internet address is XX.XX.XX.XX /30
  MTU 1500 bytes, BW 3968 Kbit, DLY 100000 usec, rely 255/255, load 1/255
  Encapsulation PPP, loopback not set
  Keepalive set (10 sec)
  DTR is pulsed for 2 seconds on reset
  LCP Open, multilink Open
  Open: IPCP
  Last input 00:00:49, output never, output hang never
  Last clearing of "show interface" counters 22:23:20
  Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 2
  Queueing strategy: fifo
  Output queue: 0/40 (size/max)
  5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
  5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
  


XX-PE-XX##s pp mu int mu 71

Multilink71, bundle name is XXXX-TEST-XXXX
  Bundle is Distributed
  0 lost fragments, 3 reordered, 0 unassigned
  1 discarded, 2 lost received, 1/255 load
  0x1AC received sequence, 0x15DF8 sent sequence
  Member links: 2 active, 0 inactive (max not set, min not set)
    Serial0/0/3:0, no frags rcvd
    Serial0/0/4:0, no frags rcvd


XX-PE-XX##s log | i 0/0/3:0

XX-PE-XX##s log | i 0/0/4:0

XX-PE-XX##s log | i Multilink71


XX-PE-XX##s log | i    XXXXXXX_VRF1
Dec 21 18:24:14.231: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor 192.168.82.26 vpn vrf XXXXXXX_VRF1 Down Peer closed the session
Dec 21 18:33:56.625: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor 192.168.82.26 vpn vrf XXXXXXX_VRF1 Up


Neighbor        V    AS MsgRcvd MsgSent   TblVer  InQ OutQ Up/Down  State/PfxRcd
XX.XX.XX.XX   4 65432  305286  326491 16073942    0    0 00:17:36        7



Lijesh.N.C

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Lijesh NC Mon, 12/21/2009 - 17:18

Hi marikakis,




Thanks for the quick responce.i dont have access to my client router but will surely try to get the logs.


will be updating soon



Regards

Lijesh

marikakis Mon, 12/21/2009 - 16:35

I agree with the comments of Giuseppe in the older thread you had posted. There exist cases of interconnection methods where failures on physical media are not reflected very well on router interface status. But there is one more thing. If the interface associated with a BGP session goes down (and assuming there is no other way for rerouting the traffic to the BGP neighbor address), the BGP session will also go down. The inverse is not always true. I mean, if the BGP session went down, this doesn't necessarily mean the interconnection circuit has failed (this is only one of the possibilities). Maybe something else went wrong on the peer BGP router. Do you have access to that router as well to see what happened there and how the event looked from the peer's perspective? Maybe the peer had high CPU load or lack of memory and started dropping sessions for example or any other malfunctions occured there.

Actions

This Discussion