Route not importet into vrf

[m-ott]

Hi

Following situation:

PE----CE-----Router

6500 3550 2610 -> PE-CE running OSPF

The PE Router distributes all routes into the OSPF vrf process. The problem on the 2610 i have all routes that come from the 6500 in the OSPF table, but the 3550 hasn't got anything in its vrf routing table, also the routes are in the ospf database as summary routes int the right ospf process. I don't know why the 3550 doesn't implement the routes int the routing table, but the 2610 does.

There are no other routes int the 3550 that could influence the import into the routing table. 3550 is runnung the extended-match template for extended routing.

IOS 3550 = 12.1.22EA3

Has anybody made the same experiance?

cheers

patrick

[Harold Ritter]

Can you include a "show ip ospf da summ x.x.x.x" for any of the network summaries on the 3550.

Thanks,

[m-ott]

hi

Do you think about the routing bit which is not set with the down bit? But the 2610 should have the same database and it importes the route... Anyway

Here's the show ip ospf da sum

kapo#sh ip ospf 10 database summary 10.53.145.113

OSPF Router with ID (172.16.10.141) (Process ID 10)

Summary Net Link States (Area 2)

LS age: 1877

Options: (No TOS-capability, DC, Downward)

LS Type: Summary Links(Network)

Link State ID: 10.53.145.113 (summary Network Number)

Advertising Router: 172.16.10.129

LS Seq Number: 8000001C

Checksum: 0x4DC7

Length: 28

Network Mask: /32

TOS: 0 Metric: 2

Thanks for your help

[Harold Ritter]

Can you also post the ospf configuration for the 3550.

Thanks,

[m-ott]

Hi

Sorry for my delay, but i still need your help :)

What i figured out is that the routing bit on the 3550 is not set for the ospf database entry but on the 2610 it is set:

2610#sh ip ospf database sum 193.222.30.1

OSPF Router with ID (193.222.35.1) (Process ID 10)

Summary Net Link States (Area 0)

Routing Bit Set on this LSA

LS age: 681

Options: (No TOS-capability, DC, Downward)

LS Type: Summary Links(Network)

Link State ID: 193.222.30.1 (summary Network Number)

Advertising Router: 172.16.10.131

LS Seq Number: 80000002

Checksum: 0x7D33

Length: 28

Network Mask: /32

TOS: 0 Metric: 1

3550#sh ip ospf database sum 193.222.30.1

OSPF Router with ID (172.16.10.135) (Process ID 10)

Summary Net Link States (Area 0)

LS age: 695

Options: (No TOS-capability, DC, Downward)

LS Type: Summary Links(Network)

Link State ID: 193.222.30.1 (summary Network Number)

Advertising Router: 172.16.10.131

LS Seq Number: 80000002

Checksum: 0x7D33

Length: 28

Network Mask: /32

TOS: 0 Metric: 1

According to my documentation the route is not inserted into the routing table if the routing bit is not set even it would be the best route according to SPF algorithm.

Is it because 3550 has its vrf tables and the 2610 has the global routing table?

The config on the 3550 is the following:

hostname 3550

!

ip routing

!

ip vrf 10_KAP

rd 10:10

route-target export 10:10

route-target import 10:10

!

!

!

interface Loopback10

ip vrf forwarding 10_KAP

ip address 172.16.10.135 255.255.255.255

!

interface Loopback100

ip address 10.53.145.135 255.255.255.255

!

interface GigabitEthernet0/1

description to d35-1

switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q

switchport trunk allowed vlan 12,101

switchport mode trunk

!

interface GigabitEthernet0/2

description to m11-1

switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q

switchport trunk allowed vlan 13,100

switchport mode trunk

!

interface Vlan11

ip vrf forwarding 10_KAP

ip address 172.16.11.97 255.255.255.248

!

interface Vlan12

ip vrf forwarding 10_KAP

ip address 172.16.11.10 255.255.255.248

!

interface Vlan13

ip vrf forwarding 10_KAP

ip address 172.16.11.2 255.255.255.248

!

interface Vlan100

ip address 10.53.144.26 255.255.255.252

!

interface Vlan101

ip address 10.53.144.30 255.255.255.252

!

router ospf 100

router-id 10.53.145.135

log-adjacency-changes

network 10.53.144.0 0.0.1.255 area 0

!

router ospf 10 vrf 10_KAP

router-id 172.16.10.135

log-adjacency-changes

network 172.16.10.135 0.0.0.0 area 0

network 172.16.11.0 0.0.0.7 area 0

network 172.16.11.8 0.0.0.7 area 0

network 172.16.11.96 0.0.0.7 area 0

!

ip classless

ip http server

!

!

The sh ip ospf database:

OSPF Router with ID (172.16.10.135) (Process ID 10)

Router Link States (Area 0)

Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum Link count

172.16.10.131 172.16.10.131 1463 0x8000000C 0x001D41 3

172.16.10.135 172.16.10.135 1492 0x80000006 0x00FC3D 3

172.16.11.83 172.16.11.83 1909 0x80000006 0x00CD0E 2

193.222.35.1 193.222.35.1 1411 0x8000000A 0x00E684 2

Net Link States (Area 0)

Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum

172.16.11.2 172.16.10.135 1492 0x80000002 0x001976

172.16.11.83 172.16.11.83 406 0x80000005 0x00178A

172.16.11.98 193.222.35.1 1411 0x80000002 0x007BC2

Summary Net Link States (Area 0)

Link ID ADV Router Age Seq# Checksum

172.16.10.129 172.16.10.131 1706 0x80000002 0x00190F

172.16.11.88 172.16.10.131 1706 0x80000002 0x007FD7

193.222.30.1 172.16.10.131 1708 0x80000002 0x007D33

cheers patrick

[m-ott]

Hi again...

I think it could be the problem with the routing bit, because i configured BGP for the PE - CE (6500 - 3550) and it worked fine...

Is there a workaround for this problem with ospf.

Cheers

patrick

[Harold Ritter]

That is what I thought. I just wanted to confirm that you were using VRF lite (multi-vrf) on the CE. You need to use the "capability vrf-lite" command under the OSPF process when vrf-lite is configured. This tells the ospf process to ignore the "downward" bit and to install the summary route in the routing table. You don't have the same issue on the 2610 cause you don't use multi-vrf.

Please refer to the following URL for more info on this command:

http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/iprrp_r/ip2_c1g.htm#wp1036522

Hope this helps,