OSPF redistribution of static routes

[FilipovGoce]

Hi all I have a problem with redistribution static routes towards Smartedge Redback Router.

I have a one route that is defined with 

ip route ip-address1 mask interface tag ..  (This route works fine and it is getting on the other side)

The others are defined as 

ip route ip-address mask ipaddress1 tag ...(These are several of them)

So on Smartedge site I get just the route defined with next hop physical interface and not the others that are pointing to the IP adress of the physical interface.

I see all the routes in ospf database but in ospf routes I just get the first one.

Can you tell me what is the issue 

[Richard Burts]

Can you post the configuration of OSPF and the configuration of the static routes. Also post the output of show ip route on the router which is doing the redistribution.

HTH

Rick

[FilipovGoce]

I would like to that but because of customer needs they do not want to show off the ip addresses.

The question was a little bit more generic if there is some issue when redistributing static routes through OSPF from Cisco 1841 SW 15.1 to Smartedge Red Back Router at customer premises.

That is why I didn't write them before.

[Richard Burts]

It is unfortunate that you can not post the information that I requested which might have made diagnosing the issue easier. But if the customer policy will not allow it then we will not have that information. Assuming that their implementation of OSPF is correct then there should not be any particular issues about advertising redistributed routes from Cisco 1841 to Smartedge Red Back Router. There are some potential issues about redistributing static routes into OSPF and here are some of the things that I would have been looking for if you could have posted the information that I requested:

- is the static route valid and does it show up in the routing table of the router doing the redistribution?

- does the redistribution command include the parameter for subnets?

- is there any distribute list or route map used to control redistribution?

HTH

Rick

[FilipovGoce]

router ospf 21
router-id ......
log-adjacency-changes
redistribute static subnets route-map name
passive-interface default
no passive-interface FastEthernet0/0.401
no passive-interface Tunnel0
no passive-interface Tunnel3
no passive-interface Tunnel6
network ...... area 21
network ...... area 21
network ...... area 21
network....... area 21

This is how it looks with networks ommitted.

If this is useful to you

[Richard Burts]

This is somewhat useful. Especially it does show that the parameter for subnets is included. Not having that parameter in the redistribution command could cause symptoms like what you describe. So we have eliminated one potential cause of the issue.

It also shows that a route map is used to control redistribution. The route map could be allowing the route (which uses the outbound interface) and not allowing the other routes. Can you post the configuration of the route map?

HTH

Rick

[paul driver]

Hello
II think Rick is correct the next step would be to review the route-map stanza

Looking at the static routes,
The one with the defined interface nexthop would be seen as a connected route and would be advertised even if the neighboring ip address isnt reachable

The ones with a defined nexthop address, They would not be advertised if those next hops were not reachable.

However that wouldn't explain them being seen in the LSDB as you have stated.

res
Paul