09-21-2010 09:54 PM - edited 03-06-2019 01:07 PM
Hi experts,
I am having one customer connected to our MPLS PE. we face strange problem of some of the prefix is showing local preference
of zero which is strange b'se no such policy (route-map) is applied to the bgp peering with that customer.
providing few output from PE end
Router#sh run vrf ABC
ip vrf ABC
rd x:x
export map EXPORTS-MAP
route-target export x:x
route-target import x:x
route-target import x:x
maximum routes 10000 80
!
!
!
router bgp 9498
!
address-family ipv4 vrf ABC
no synchronization
bgp dampening 5
redistribute connected route-map SET-COMMUNITY-CONNECTED
redistribute static route-map SET-COMMUNITY-STATIC
neighbor x.x.x.2 remote-as 9730
neighbor x.x.x.2 activate
neighbor x.x.x.2 as-override
neighbor x.x.x.2 prefix-list ABCD in
exit-address-family
!
interface Serial2/0/1.6 point-to-point
ip vrf forwarding ABC
ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.252
end
Router#sh ip bgp vpnv4 vrf ABC 10.140.63.0/26
BGP routing table entry for x:x:10.140.63.0/26, version 160176610
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table ABC)
Advertised to update-groups:
1
64671
x.x.x.2 from x.x.x.2
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 0, valid, external, best
Extended Community: RT:x:x
mpls labels in/out 4416/nolabel
Please let me know if someone has faced similar problem. local pref should be 100 by default but here it seems to be something strange
thanks in advance
09-22-2010 01:18 AM
Hi,
it's also strange I see
Router#sh ip bgp vpnv4 vrf ABC 10.140.63.0/26
BGP routing table entry for x:x:10.140.63.0/26, version 160176610
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table ABC)
Advertised to update-groups:
1
64671
x.x.x.2 from x.x.x.2
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 0, valid, external, best
Extended Community: RT:x:x
mpls labels in/out 4416/nolabel
while you are having
neighbor x.x.x.2 remote-as 9730
in your config.
Doesn't the customer use something complex like Route Reflectors to Exchange VPNv4 Routes
(http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/fsiasl22.html#wp1030302 )
in his network?
BR,
Milan
09-22-2010 02:48 AM
No, it is not correct,
I have changed output you can consider it as 9730.
But it seems this is malfunctioning of router and strange.
let me see if someone has faced similar problem or i will log tac case
thanks for your reply
Regards
mahesh
11-02-2010 12:57 AM
Well guys there is update may be helpful to others
it is declared as bug by cisco: CSCtj23145
and this happens for vrf where we have used export-map and the workaround is to add one more statement in route-map with LP=100
like
route-map permit 40
set local-preference 100
Regards
Mahesh
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