You have to remember that the reported distance by a router has to be less than the feasible distance for that route for it to be considered a feasible successor.
In your case, the FD is 40537600 but the reported distance (RD) by R3 (when considering R2) is also 40537600. Since the RD is equal to the FD (but not less than the FD), it is considered to not be a feasible successor. The same applies for the route advertised by R2 to R3.
Hope that helps - pls do remember to rate the post if it does.
You can certainly introduce a delay using an offset-list so either R2 will use R3 as a feasible successor OR R3 will use R2 as a feasible successor. However, there is no way to make them both use each other as feasible successors. If one is the FS for the other, then the other cannot be the FS for the first one - that is once again as per the definition of feasible successor. You will have to live with one of the routers going active when the main link fails.
Question We run asr9001 with XR 6.1.3, and we have a very long delay to
login w/ SSH 1 or 2 to the device compare to IOS device. After
investigation, the there is 1s delay between the client KEXDH_INIT and
the server (XR) KEXDH_REPLY. After debug ssh serv...
Introduction The purpose of this document is to demonstrate the Open
Shortest Path First (OSPF) behavior when the V-bit (Virtual-link bit) is
present in a non-backbone area. The V-bit is signaled in Type-1 LSA only
if the router is the endpoint of one or ...
Hi, I am seeing quite a few issues with patch install and wanted to
share my experience and workaround to this. Login to admin via CLI, then
access root with the “shell” command Issue “df –h” and you’ll probably
see the following directory full or nearly ...