cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
229
Views
3
Helpful
10
Replies

Routes are being received from BGP but are not in the routing table

Victor Wardi
Level 1
Level 1

Hi guys, 

I have the following connection between the router and the firewall:

VictorWardi_0-1719340861219.png

The routes are being received from the BGP peer but are not in the routing table.

Follows the Cisco config:

VictorWardi_1-1719340944797.png

VictorWardi_2-1719340984698.png

VictorWardi_3-1719341138997.png

Does anyone have any idea what the problem is?

 

Victor Wardi
2 Accepted Solutions

Accepted Solutions

Harold Ritter
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

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
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México

View solution in original post

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

View solution in original post

10 Replies 10

these prefix have next-hop same as prefix ??
can you show the topology with more detail 

MHM

these prefix have next-hop same as prefix ??

Yes, the FortiGate was redistributing the connected routes. I disabled it. Below is the new output:

VictorWardi_0-1719503104502.png

can you show the topology with more detail 

VictorWardi_2-1719503353302.png

R10 is receiving a static route redistributed via BGP from the FortiGate.

Fortigate BGP config:

VictorWardi_3-1719503415156.png

There's no NAT configured**

Victor Wardi

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

VictorWardi_2-1719503353302.png

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

That was the issue. Thank you so much! You have keen eyes.

VictorWardi_0-1719508242070.png

 

Victor Wardi

you are so welcome friend 

have a nice summer 

MHM

nguyenbmt106
Level 1
Level 1

nguyenbmt106_0-1719361525252.png

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.

Harold Ritter
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

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
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México

That was the issue. Thank you so much! You have keen eyes.

VictorWardi_0-1719508242070.png

Victor Wardi

You are very welcome @Victor Wardi and thanks for the feedback

Harold Ritter
Sr Technical Leader
CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
harold@cisco.com
México móvil: +52 1 55 8312 4915
Cisco México
Paseo de la Reforma 222
Piso 19
Cuauhtémoc, Juárez
Ciudad de México, 06600
México
Review Cisco Networking for a $25 gift card