i have 3 routers connected to a shared medium (net 10.1.1.0/24). R1 (.1) and R2 (.2) are eigrp negihbors and i have a 2nd network, 192.168.7.0/24 configured on R3(.3)'s Looback0 interface.
My purpose was to redistribute net 192.168.7.0 on R2 into eigrp and to advertise it from here to R1 with R3 as next hop, without R1 and R3 becoming eigrp neighbors. I have used the no ip next-ho-self eigrp command on R2's interface connected to the shared medium.
I have managed to redistribute 192.168.7.0 as intended when i used eigrp (different process), ripv2 and ospf between R2 and R3 on the shared medium. Notheles,setting 10.1.1.3 as next hop for the route failed when using iBGP (with bgp redistribute-internal) and when having a static route on R2 with 10.1.1.3 (R3 shared medium ip) as next-hop ( ip route 192.168.77.0 255.255.255.0 10.1.1.3 ).
----------------Successfull propagation of the route with R3 as next hop-----------------------
I have found only following as neccessary condition so that the nect hop may be changed in the advertised route:
"EIGRP fills in the next-hop field in the updates and sends them out on an interface connected to a shared medium if the source and destination of the update are also reachable through the same interface. "
Could anybody please explain why eigrp fails to change the next-hop of a route when advertising it to a neoghbor if the route is originally learned via BGP or static routing ? And if possible, please advise a solution/workaround.
thank you for your answer, I will also try the redistribution from BGP on machines with newer IOS to see how it works.
Nonetheless could you please advice if there is any reason this is not working when I try to redistribute a static route ? Is this behaviour caused by the fact that the redistributing router, R2 in this case, can't detect if the next-hop, R3, is alive on the shared medium and if that is the case might using BFD between the two change anything ?
I just looked and the bgp fix was done in 2008 via CSCsm95129. I don't see any signs of anyone reporting static not working for ipv4 (though there is an open bug for ipv6) and I don't see static routes in my original unit testing. I'm not sure whether it will work or not. If it just doesn't work, open a case and get a defect filed.
thank you once more for your reply. I will try to further test 3rd party next hop with static routes using newer versions of IOS and in case it wil stilll not work as expected i will open a case as you advised.
This is actually a pretty cool feature, i didn't even know it existed until I was looking for a solution to advertise a subnet (prefix in BGP talk), only if a certain condition existed. This is exactly what conditional advertisements does
j ai une question j ai achete un routeur cisco 887VA-k9 , je le configuré avec la configuration ci- dessous
si je le lier avec mon pc portable sur l un de ses ports directement ça marche toute est bien ( la connexion internet + m...
Attached policy provides CLI access to the Cisco 4G router over text messaging. Two files are in the attached .tar file:
2. PDF with instructions on how to load and use the .tcl file.