- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-25-2024 11:50 AM
Hi guys,
I have the following connection between the router and the firewall:
The routes are being received from the BGP peer but are not in the routing table.
Follows the Cisco config:
Does anyone have any idea what the problem is?
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Labels:
-
Other Routers
-
Other Routing
Accepted Solutions
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 09:33 AM
Hi @Victor Wardi ,
The inbound prefix-list does not permit 192.168.0.0/16. So the prefix will never make it to the routing table.
Regards,
Harold Ritter, CCIE #4168 (EI, SP)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 09:36 AM
I found issue you use in filter
192.168.0.0/24 le 32
Use instead
192.168.0.0/16 le 32
That it
MHM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-25-2024 12:17 PM
these prefix have next-hop same as prefix ??
can you show the topology with more detail
MHM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 08:52 AM - edited 06-27-2024 08:53 AM
these prefix have next-hop same as prefix ??
Yes, the FortiGate was redistributing the connected routes. I disabled it. Below is the new output:
can you show the topology with more detail
R10 is receiving a static route redistributed via BGP from the FortiGate.
Fortigate BGP config:
There's no NAT configured**
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 09:12 AM
the FW send the prefix the router receive it but not inject into RIB
two reason the next hop is un reachable that can not be since the 189.110.30.0 is subnet direct connect FW to R10
the other reason is you have filter with direction IN filter this prefix
MHM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 09:36 AM
I found issue you use in filter
192.168.0.0/24 le 32
Use instead
192.168.0.0/16 le 32
That it
MHM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 10:11 AM
That was the issue. Thank you so much! You have keen eyes.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 10:12 AM
you are so welcome friend
have a nice summer
MHM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-25-2024 05:29 PM
From R10's show ip bgp summary, it looks like the peer didn't advertise any prefixes (look at "State/PfxRcd").
Second thing is from R10's BGP table, these 2 prefixes are not marked as best, so it will not be added to the R10's routing table.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 09:33 AM
Hi @Victor Wardi ,
The inbound prefix-list does not permit 192.168.0.0/16. So the prefix will never make it to the routing table.
Regards,
Harold Ritter, CCIE #4168 (EI, SP)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 10:11 AM
That was the issue. Thank you so much! You have keen eyes.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
06-27-2024 10:20 AM - edited 06-27-2024 10:20 AM
You are very welcome @Victor Wardi and thanks for the feedback
Harold Ritter, CCIE #4168 (EI, SP)
