EIGRP Redistribute Connected Not Propagating

[stuart_jones]

Hi all,

I have an issue with connected networks in EIGRP not propagating through the network beyond the immediate EIGRP neighbour.

The network has OSPF on one side and EIGRP on the other with static routes pointing to either side.

My issue is on the EIGRP side when the 10.30.2.0/30 link between EIGRP Core 2 and EIGRP Distribution goes down the EIGRP Distribution does not learn the VLAN 40 interface network via EIGRP Core 1.

I have put together a diagram below of a section of the network.

Should the connected networks on EIGRP Core 2 be learned by the EIGRP Distribution via EIGRP Core 1 when the link between EIGRP Core 2 and EIGRP Distribution goes down?

Thanks,

Stuart

[Giuseppe Larosa · Accepted solution]

Hello Stuart,e

your issue is caused by EIGRP stub feature that you have configured on both EIGRP core1 and EIGRP core 2.

This feature is recommended only for leaf routers without other routers behind them.

either you:

remove the eigrp stub option on the two EIGRP core1 and core2 routers so that normal EIGRP routing can occur

OR

you need to use EIGRP stub feature for licensing questions you need to use a leak map that is to define a route-map to define what IP subnets the EIGRP stub router is allowed to advertise to other peers.

on both routers EIGRP core1, EIGRP core2 do the following:

ip prefix-list LEAK-NETS permit 10.20.0.0/16 le 32

route-map LEAK permit 10

match address prefix LEAK-NETS

!

note the leak-map LEAK may need to be applied under eigrp stub command

like

router eigrp 1

eigrp stub connected static summary redistributed leak-map LEAK

Hope to help

Giuseppe

[stuart_jones]

Thank Giuseppe that worked.
The issue I am now seeing is when either of the links from the EIGRP Distribution to the EIGRP Core go down pings from the 172.16.1.0 network to the 192.168.1.0 network fail. The addresses I have used in the diagram do not replicate the addresses we have in production.
The VLAN interfaces on all the cores are all in the range 172.16.x.x/24 and there are static routes to 172.16.0.0/16 (the OSPF side of the network) on both EIGRP cores. I though the more specific /24 route would supersede the static route. Is this not the case?

[stuart_jones]

Ignore this, I'd missed some config out

[Georg Pauwen]

Hello,

as stated, the redistributed connected routes on EIGRP Core 2 will show up as D EX routes on EIGRP Core 1 and not be propagated to EIGRP Distribution due to the stub feature. 

An alternative to the leak maps could be to just add static routes on EIGRP Distribution for the networks you want to reach, with an administrative distance of 171, e.g.:

ip route 10.40.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.2.1.1 171

[stuart_jones]

Hi Gents,

Thanks for your guidance. 

I had to put stub command in because the static or connected weren't being redistributed and this must have been due to licencing which I'll look into.

The diagram is representative of the lab I've put together so hopefully the router in the production network has the correct licencing.