It looks like you're redistributing these routes in eigrp AS 29 or a possible route feedback
This reason why it shows FD as inaccessible is because R1 is not using eigrp routes for the prefixes in the routing table. There could another protocol with a better metric for those routes. Perhaps a show ip route for prefixes in the eigrp topology would help.
In your case since you'd like eigrp routes to be preferred, tweaking the administrative distance to be higher than 170 on the routes from routing protocol which is currently preferred would produce the desired result.
That means the Successors being learned via redistribution?
The routes are being redistributed into eigrp, however since the advertised distance is 0 (51200/0), these routes have better metric from another protocol and are not installed in the routing as being learnt from eigrp, since eigrp external routes have an administrative distance of 170.
How do i see who is the successor..?
Eigrp routes for these prefixes are not installed in the routing table, hence there is no successor shown.
Use sh ip eigrp topology [prefix]
should give details regarding the next-hop or successor
Use sh ip route [prefix] to see the details regarding prefix.
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 ...