Here is my output of "show ip bgp neighbors 184.108.40.206 advertised-routes" on the router at LOC 2
BGP table version is 197644, local router ID is 10.255.0.2
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 100.100.96.0/21 0.0.0.0 12345 i
*> 100.100.104.0/21 0.0.0.0 12345 i
*> 220.127.116.11/22 0.0.0.0 12345 i
*> 18.104.22.168/22 100.100.105.26 91 12345 i
*> 22.214.171.124/22 100.100.105.26 81 12345 i
*>i126.96.36.199/21 100.100.105.1 0 90 0 i
*> 188.8.131.52/24 100.100.105.26 71 12345 i
*> 184.108.40.206/24 100.100.105.4 22 12345 i
Total number of prefixes 8
Right now, the inbound traffic from each upstream ISP is somewhat equal, as my announcements are the same on each router.
I want change the advertising of my IP space to my upstream providers to be more specific to each location. Some /24's are only handled by the router at LOC 1 and others are only handled by LOC 2. There is no reason to have inbound traffic for LOC 2 come into the router at LOC 1 and having to cross the metro ethernet link to get to the other router. However, I need redundancy, in case of an outage (hence the need to announce all IP space from both routers)
I understand that more specific route announcements win over less specific. So, the idea is to advertise more specific routes on each router that is handling the given IP space and be less specific on the other router (to preserve redundancy). My IP address layout was designed to be able to aggregate /24 into /22 at each location. So, I have the flexibility to advertise more or less specific at each location.
Now my question... Since I currently use the "summary-only" option within my aggregate-address statements, my announcements are grouped in to smaller prefixes (see above), which will not work if I want to advertise my IP space more specific.
If I omit the "summary-only" option, I assume that it announce the given IP space without any aggregations. Is there a downside or problem to omitting the "summary-only" option?
I've noticed in my test setup that I may not get what I'm looking for, since the routes in my routing table will now show both, the /24's and the /22's and therefore my announcements to my upstream are not what I expected. Is is time for a "suppress map" to suppress what I'm advertising to each upstream peer?
If you remove summary-only, you receive both aggregated routes and actual routes which causes having a larger BGP data base. If you are receiving the actual paths, the aggregated routes are necessary? If not, you can remove the aggregation completely.
If you intend to receive or send only aggregated routes and only some /24, you can use unsuppress-map along with aggregation.
Cisco DNA Center version 2.2.2.x includes the features and improvements that
New intelligence provides an easy, gradual, and complete adoption of SD-Access. Faster Cisco DNA Center set-up saves time and effort.
When using Cisco cellular modules with a SIM card an APN must be provided. The APN cannot be stored in the SIM card and is supplied by your SIM card provider. Cisco cellular software contains a database of well-known APNs based on the country and ...
Cisco 3850: IOS-XE/Firmware Upgrade
This procedure is aimed at Cisco 3850 switch ONLY.
IOS-XE Bundle Mode is not covered.
9300, 9500 (vanilla & high-performance), ISR 1k, ISR 4k and ASR is not covered.
Listen: https://smarturl.it/CCRS8E46Follow us: twitter.com/ciscochampionsIt’s been several years since the release of Cisco DNA Center, and it’s matured into a complete network management system, an automation and orchestration engine, an AI/ML analy...
The 2021 IT Blog Awards, hosted by Cisco, is now open for submissions. Submit your blog, vlog or podcast today. For more information, including category details, the process, past winners and FAQs, check out: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/t...