MPLS route leaking issue

[nagasheshu.2014]

Hi All,

We have TWO MPLS circuits on same PE of same customer with two different vrf's X & Y but import and export RT are same.

Please see below configuration and outputs.

There is a route in X VRF 192.168.26.0/24 which is not being leaked on to Y vrf though with same import and export RT's.

I could see this route in X vrf routing and vpnv4 bgp table but not seeing Y vrf routing and VPNV4 bgp table. there are no export or import maps in two fo the VRFs.

What could be the reason please? how to fix this? Let me know if you  need more information.

PE#sh run vrf x
Building configuration...

Current configuration : 993 bytes
ip vrf x
 rd 10000:1438360
 route-target export 10000:1416396
 route-target import 10000:1416396
!
!
interface Vlan3027
 description customer-AAA
 ip vrf forwarding x
 ip address 10.161.146.213 255.255.255.252
!
router bgp 10000
 !
 address-family ipv4 vrf x
  no synchronization
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 remote-as 64699
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 update-source Vlan3027
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 activate
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 send-community
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 default-originate route-map PRIMARY
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 as-override
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 prefix-list DEFAULT out
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 route-map PREFHIGH in
  neighbor 10.161.146.214 route-map PRIMARY out
 exit-address-family
!
end

PE#


PE#sh ip route vrf x 192.168.26.0

Routing Table: x
Routing entry for 192.168.26.0/24, 3 known subnets
  Variably subnetted with 2 masks
B        192.168.26.0/24 [20/0] via 10.161.146.214, 01:45:02


PE#sh ip bgp vpnv4 vrf x 192.168.26.0/24
BGP routing table entry for 10000:1438360:192.168.26.0/24, version 140486262
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table x)
  Advertised to update-groups:
     1144
  64699
    10.161.146.214 from 10.161.146.214 (10.161.40.229)
      Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 250, valid, external, best
      Extended Community: RT:10000:1416396
      mpls labels in/out 5208/nolabel
PE#


PE#sh run vrf Y
Building configuration...

Current configuration : 987 bytes
ip vrf Y
 rd 10000:1237556
 route-target export 10000:1416396
 route-target import 10000:1416396
!
!
interface Vlan2659
 description customer-AAA
 ip vrf forwarding Y
 ip address 10.161.143.161 255.255.255.252
!
router bgp 10000
 !
 address-family ipv4 vrf Y
  no synchronization
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 remote-as 64699
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 update-source Vlan2659
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 activate
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 send-community
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 default-originate route-map PRIMARY
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 as-override
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 prefix-list DEFAULT out
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 route-map PREFHIGH in
  neighbor 10.161.143.162 route-map PRIMARY out
 exit-address-family
!
end

PE#


PE#sh ip route vrf Y 192.168.26.0 255.255.255.0

Routing Table: Y
% Subnet not in table
PE#

PE#sh ip bgp vpnv4 vrf Y 192.168.26.0/24
% Network not in table
PE#

Thanks,

Nagasheshu.

[cofee]

Hi there,

The configuration you shared, is this from the same router or I should say 1 router?

[nagasheshu.2014]

yes please.

[nagasheshu.2014]

can someone please help. Thanks in advance.

[cofee]

I tested this in a lab and I was able to get the route propagated to other VRF. I used the same VRF paramaters as yours. Is it possible that vrf table might need to be reset?

You can clear/reset both VRFs using commands below if you haven't already done that:

clear ip bgp vrf x ipv4 unicast "as number" soft

clear ip bgp vrf y ipv4 unicast "as number" soft

[nagasheshu.2014]

tried now, did not help.

[cofee]

Are you getting other routes installed in vrf y that you are receiving from vrf x or there is only 1 prefix that's having an issue?

[nagasheshu.2014]

there is only one local subnet in X VRF. There is another vrf Z of same customer and same RT's on same router, has same issue. BUt there is no such problem between Z & Y.

And one more point to note, 192.168.26.0/24 route in X VRF is being announced to other routers in MPLS(for same customer and same RT's again)

issue is only local to this PE.....

[cofee]

Not sure why it's not working. Your configuaration seem to be ok, route targets are set the way they should be. I wouldn't worry about route-maps under the BGP process for both VRFs because that shouldn't be the problem as you are getting the route in one of the VRFs but not getting populated to other VRFs.

is it possible to delete and recreate the vrf that's not receiving the prefix?

[cofee]

Not sure why it's not working. Your configuaration seem to be ok, route targets are set the way they should be. I wouldn't worry about route-maps under the BGP process for both VRFs because that shouldn't be the problem as you are getting the route in one of the VRFs but not getting populated to other VRFs.

is it possible to delete and recreate the vrf that's not receiving the prefix?

[nagasheshu.2014]

Not sure, need to check. I will get back to you and thanks again for helping me.