OSPF filtering

[huw.morgan]

This should be easy, but I'm having problems.

I have a pair of layer 3 switches which are talking OSPF. On each switch there are a few static routes which I want to advertise to the other switch. I've redistributed these into OSPF for this purpose.

However there is a third switch to which each of my two switches has an OSPF adjacency. I want to advertise all the routes known to my pair of switches to the third switch, EXCEPT those statics.

My first thought was a simple distribute-list - filtering which routes were advertised out. It turns out this isn't allowed by the software.

As a second option I configured inbound distribute-lists on Switch 3. This didn't work - I'm guessing it's because Switch 3 is an ABR, and my two switches are in a non-backbone area.

How can I do this? All switches are running 12.2 IOS.

[Edison Ortiz · Accepted solution]

My first thought was a simple distribute-list - filtering which routes were advertised out. It turns out this isn't allowed by the software.

It's not a IOS issue but the way OSPF works.

As a second option I configured inbound distribute-lists on Switch 3. This didn't work - I'm guessing it's because Switch 3 is an ABR, and my two switches are in a non-backbone area.

Once you introduce LSAs into an area and the 3 routers are sharing the same area, you can't filter LSAs.

It sounds like for your requirement, you need a distance vector protocol such as RIPv2 or EIGRP.

__

Edison.

[huw.morgan]

Thanks for the advice Edison.

I can't use any other routing protocols as it would go against my customer's policy. However, I may be able to get round it using static routes: not elegant, but functional.

[Richard Burts]

Huw

An inbound distribute list on a router/switch running OSPF will not prevent the LSAs getting into the Link State Database, but it can prevent the routes getting into the local routing table. From your description I would have thought that this would accomplish what you want. When you say that you configured a distribute list and that it did not work, how were you determining whether it worked or not? If the routes were in the routing table then there was something not correct in your distribute list.

[edit] another possibility to consider: configure 2 OSPF processes on switches 1 and 2. Configure 1 process to talk to switch 1 or 2 and the other process to talk to switch 3. You would need to redistribute routes between the processes and the redistribution can be filtered. This is more complex but if it is important to you to be able to filter routes (and LSAs) being advertised to switch 3 then this approach will work.

HTH

Rick

[huw.morgan]

I had thought about two OSPF processes, but decided against; the support staff have a large number of switches to look after - my aim is to make things as simple as possible for them.

In case I did make a mistake, the configuration I used was as follows:

Switch 1:

router ospf 1

area 0.0.0.1 range 10.10.0.0 255.255.252.0

redistribute static subnets

!

ip route 172.30.1.0 255.255.255.0 10.10.1.128

!

Switch 2:

router ospf 1

area 0.0.0.1 range 10.10.0.0 255.255.252.0

redistribute static subnets

!

ip route 172.30.2.0 255.255.255.0 10.10.2.128

!

Switch 3

router ospf 1

network 10.0.5.0 0.0.0.255 area 0.0.0.0

network 10.255.1.1 0.0.0.3 area 0.0.0.1

network 10.255.2.1 0.0.0.3 area 0.0.0.1

distribute-list INWARD in GigabitEthernet1/1

!

ip access-list standard INWARD

permit 10.10.0.0 0.0.3.255

!

(10.255.1.0/30 and 10.255.2.0/30 are the subnets for the links to Sw1 and Sw2)

The only route I want advertised is the 10.10.0.0/22, but the 172.30 networks are advertised as well.

[Richard Burts]

Huw

Without knowing a bit more about the topology of the network it is difficult to properly evaluate the configuration and operation of the distribute list. Is Gig1/1 the interface that connects to both switch 1 and switch 2? The distribute list as configured only operates on updates received from interface Gig1/1. What happens if you change the distribute list like this:

distribute-list INWARD in

(remove the interface reference)

HTH

Rick

[huw.morgan]

Sorry Rick, there's a line missing which applies the distribute list to G1/2.

G1/1 -> Sw1, G1/2 -> Sw2.

I can't apply the distribute list generally, as Sw3 has to learn many routes from other switches in the network.