Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
New Member

PBR weird behaviour

Hi there,

We're trying to re-direct traffic between 2 subnets to a portchannel interface. The configuration is straight forward, 2 physical layer 3 interfaces combined a layer 3 portchannel on a 6509E. refer to the attachment.

We tested it using traceroute, traffic is being matched by the route-map but it's not sent to the right next hop -172.16.0.161! Any clues?

Cheers,

Daniel

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Hall of Fame Super Silver

Re: PBR weird behaviour

Hello Daniel,

in your PBR route-map you have used:

ip default next-hop 172.16.0.161

you should have used

set ip next-hop 172.16.0.161

otherwise normal routing table is used first when the default option is inserted.

if you want traffic to be redirected when next-hop is available you need to use set ip next-hop 172.16.0.161

Hope to help

Giuseppe

4 REPLIES
Cisco Employee

Re: PBR weird behaviour

HI daniel,

PBR supports vary a lot from switches to switches. What switches type and software do you have ?

Also I notice your pbr next-hop is not directly connected ? Did you try with directly connected next-hop ?

Which route do you use to reach your next-hop ?

Roland

New Member

Re: PBR weird behaviour

Hi Roland,

All switches are 6509E's, running s72033-ipservices_wan-mz.122-33.SXI2.bin.

The next hop is directly connected. Local Po6 ip address is 172.16.0.162, and remote's ip address is 172.16.0.161.

Daniel

Hall of Fame Super Silver

Re: PBR weird behaviour

Hello Daniel,

in your PBR route-map you have used:

ip default next-hop 172.16.0.161

you should have used

set ip next-hop 172.16.0.161

otherwise normal routing table is used first when the default option is inserted.

if you want traffic to be redirected when next-hop is available you need to use set ip next-hop 172.16.0.161

Hope to help

Giuseppe

New Member

Re: PBR weird behaviour

Hi Giuseppe,

I just CAN'T believe it... I looked into my configuration tens of time to not realize of this error.

I'm totally aware of the difference between ip default next-hop and ip next-hop but I never saw it!!

Thanks for your detailed eye ;)

Daniel

Ps: will modify the config, test it and let you know in case it didn't work; though I don't believe it would be the case.

147
Views
0
Helpful
4
Replies
CreatePlease to create content