09-02-2010 07:25 AM - edited 03-04-2019 09:38 AM
I have come accross an interesting affect of iBGP router reflection within a single AS. We have a number of multilayer switches accross a number of different PoPs. All running iBGP sessions back to our Route Reflectors in the Core. All routers in our network are configured for iBGP multi-path 2.
We have a customer which is dual connected within one of our PoPs. They have two routers, each connected to different access switches. The routers are assigned a /30 for their outside interface, to connect to us, and we then have static routes pointing a /27 customer allocation to each /30. Each access switch redistributes these statics into iBGP.
SW1 -> Router 1 next-hop for /27
SW2 -> Router 2 hext-hop for /27
When logged onto either of the Router Reflectors I can see both routes for the /27 in the BGP table and the routing table. The route reflector has installed bother customer routers as the next-hop address for the /27 and is load-sharing to them both.
RR1 -> /27 via SW1 and SW2
We recently had customer B, who connects at a different PoP, start talking to customer A. I have notices that the routers in other PoPs only have one router to customer A's /27. I have checked the BGP table and only recieve one route from the Route Reflectors.
SW3 -> /27 via SW1
Reading the details on RR I can see that this is stated as standard behaviour:
I want to know if there is some IOS knob I can tweak to get the RR to advertise both BGP paths to this /27?
Solved! Go to Solution.
09-02-2010 07:38 AM
Hello James,
this is a known issue with RR servers only within a L3 VPN you can use as workaround two different route distinguisher to have both VPNv4 routes propagated but if routes are in address family ipv4 unicast there is no easy workaround
this is written in docs about BGP multpath
see
Route Reflector Limitation
With multiple iBGP paths installed in a routing table, a route reflector will advertise only one of the paths (one next hop).
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/12_2t2/feature/guide/ftbgpls.html
Hope to help
Giuseppe
09-02-2010 07:38 AM
Hello James,
this is a known issue with RR servers only within a L3 VPN you can use as workaround two different route distinguisher to have both VPNv4 routes propagated but if routes are in address family ipv4 unicast there is no easy workaround
this is written in docs about BGP multpath
see
Route Reflector Limitation
With multiple iBGP paths installed in a routing table, a route reflector will advertise only one of the paths (one next hop).
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/12_2t2/feature/guide/ftbgpls.html
Hope to help
Giuseppe
09-02-2010 07:46 AM
I though that might be the case.
Tnx
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: