Static Routes Not Redistributed into EIGRP

[kava_kicks]

Hi,

I am trying to selectively redistribute static routes into EIGRP. I have tried many different ways of doing it, but nothing seems to work. I thought it may have been an IOS bug (config changes not taking effect until next reboot), so I even rebooted the router but that did not have an effect either.

I am using a route map to match the routes and I have even put in both a default metric for static routes and a default metric for EIGRP - even though I read that EIGRP does not need a default metric for static routes.

My config is shown below.

Regards.

_______________________

interface Serial0/0.16 point-to-point

bandwidth 128

ip address 10.99.1.30 255.255.255.252

ip accounting output-packets

no ip route-cache

ip summary-address eigrp 300 10.11.0.0 255.255.0.0 5

no ip mroute-cache

frame-relay class 2MBaccess/512CIR

frame-relay interface-dlci 16

!

router eigrp 300

redistribute static metric 1000 100 250 100 1500 route-map Static

network 10.0.0.0

network 192.0.0.0

default-metric 1000 100 250 100 1500

no auto-summary

no eigrp log-neighbor-changes

!

ip route 10.112.16.0 255.255.248.0 10.11.1.3

ip route 10.112.16.0 255.255.248.0 10.11.2.3

ip route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.11.1.3

ip route 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.11.2.3

ip route 192.168.138.0 255.255.255.0 10.11.1.3

ip route 192.168.138.0 255.255.255.0 10.11.2.3

!

route-map Static permit 10

match ip address 20

set metric 1000 100 250 100 1500

!

route-map Static deny 15

!

access-list 20 remark Static routes distributed into EIGRP

access-list 20 permit 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255

access-list 20 permit 192.168.138.0 0.0.0.255

show ip route | include 192.

S 192.168.1.0/24 [1/0] via 10.11.1.3

S 192.168.138.0/24 [1/0] via 10.11.1.3

S 10.112.16.0/21 [1/0] via 10.11.1.3

[rwiesmann]

Hi,

you have the summary on the interface configured.

ip summary-address eigrp 300 10.11.0.0 255.255.0.0 5

Take this command away. This will only allow you to advertise this route out this interface.

Hpe that helps

Roger

[kava_kicks]

Hi Roger,

I have successfully got this to work even with the summary route on. As one of the later posts points out, the summary route will only affect the routes that *can* be summarised - not the others.

Thanks for your input though.

[Richard Burts]

I do not agree with the other post about whether the summary address configured on the interface will impact your redistribution of static routes. The summary address will send a summary of any more specific routes within 10.11.0.0 but will not affect the advertisement of other routes.

You have not included in your post any demonstration that redistribution is not working. How have you determined that redistribution is not working? You will not see much change on the router where redistribution is done, and you should check what is advertised to a neighbor to determine whether redistribution is working.

I am also puzzled by the last thing in your post:

show ip route | include 192.

S 192.168.1.0/24 [1/0] via 10.11.1.3

S 192.168.138.0/24 [1/0] via 10.11.1.3

S 10.112.16.0/21 [1/0] via 10.11.1.3

how did the last line (for 10.112.16.0) match the include in the show command?

HTH

Rick

[kava_kicks]

Hi, Thanks for the reply.

I read somewhere that if the static route was being redistributed by EIGRP that it would have a D or an EX next to it. However, the routes that are listed above are on the router that I am trying to redistribute *from*. So, it makes sense that they are listed as a (S)tatic ... my mistake. The last line listed was just a typo (I did several show ip route commands).

[m.lammerse · Accepted solution]

Hi there,

you can't check the redistribution by looking at your routing table. It shows you the statics, since they have a lower admin distance than EIGRP routes.

Check your distribution with the 'show ip eigrp topology' command on the router that you're distributing from. Or, check the routing table of the EIGRP neighbor which your advertising the routes to.

BTW, it's a bit strange that you have duplicate static routes (presumably for load balancing), but the routes apparently are not equal cost since there is only one route in the routing table. If you want unequal-cost load balancing you should configure the variance command under the EIGRP proces.

HTH,

Marcel

[Richard Burts]

Marcel

I had thought about the information in the routing table when I posted my response and I believe that there are probably two routes in the table but that they are not included in the post. I noted that he did not do a show ip route and paste in the entries we are interested in, but did a show ip route with the "| include" logic. This would pick up the first entry in the routing table and would miss the second route (because the network prefix is not printed on the second line when there are two equal cost routes in the table).

Given the configuration that was posted the static routes being redistributed would have the same metric and would appear as two equal cost routes in the routing table without requiring variance.

HTH

Rick

[m.lammerse]

Hi Rick,

you are absolutely right. Well observed.

Thanks,

Marcel

[kava_kicks]

Hi Marcel,

Thanks for pointing that out ... I was confusing myeself it seems (by looking at the local routing table).

I looked on the EIGRP neighbour and it appears that I am redistributing the route (see below).

I have no idea why the second route is not showing up as an equal route (it is for load balancing) - but I will have to leave that for another day!

I am going to try and redistribute a 'fake' route that is not seen anywhere else on the network to double check that it is working correctly.

ROUTER B #show ip eigrp topology 192.168.138.0 255.255.255.0

% IP-EIGRP (AS 200): Route not in topology table

IP-EIGRP (AS 300): Topology entry for 192.168.138.0/24

State is Passive, Query origin flag is 1, 0 Successor(s), FD is 4294967295

Routing Descriptor Blocks:

10.99.1.30 (Serial1/0.127), from 10.99.1.30, Send flag is 0x0

Composite metric is (20537600/2585600), Route is External

Vector metric:

Minimum bandwidth is 128 Kbit

Total delay is 21000 microseconds

Reliability is 250/255

Load is 100/255

Minimum MTU is 1500

Hop count is 1

External data:

Originating router is 10.99.1.30

AS number of route is 0

External protocol is Static, external metric is 0

Administrator tag is 0 (0x00000000)

[kava_kicks]

OK, it works ... seems likely that it was probably working all along and that it was only my naivitee in thinking that I should be able to see the routes being redistributed by looking at the local route table that was the problem. Thanks for all your help - much appreciated.

Note To Self: When checking to see if static routes are correctly being redistributed into EIGRP, use the "show ip eigrp topology" command.

[m.lammerse]

Glad it works, Kava!

Regards,

Marcel