Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
- Cisco Community
- :
- About paulstone80
Stats
Member since
10-24-2007
165
Posts
87
Helpful
14
Solutions
07-06-2015
08:01 AM
Hi Vinit, On the production switches where I have the issue the bgp router-id is defined under the address family. How have you configured the bgp peering, did you specify the remote-as for the neighbor? Thanks, Paul
... View more
07-06-2015
05:08 AM
Hi Simon, I would recommend redistributing the BGP learned default route into OSPF, and influencing the metrics within OSPF to favour the route learned via the ISP. This can be done at the point of redistribution through a number of methods. It's much cleaner to influence routing within the same IGP rather than trying to play around with the admin distances. Hope that helps, Paul
... View more
07-06-2015
03:50 AM
Hi,
Can anyone advise on the best practice/recommended method for creating iBGP peers between VRF's on different routers please?
I have two transit routers that are running a VRF to eBGP peer with our Internal network, and also eBGP peer out to an External network. The transit routers should also peer with each other via iBGP.
The current configuration for iBGP peering is using the local-as command to use the AS assigned to the VRF. This creates an eBGP peer relationship between the two transit routers, and they drop the prefixes advertised between each each other due to AS LOOP.
Config
Transit Router R1
router bgp 65000
!
address-family ipv4 vrf VRF_AS65200
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 peer-group
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 local-as 65200
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 description IBGP to 65200 iBGP
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 timers 3 10
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 send-community
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 172.25.84.102 remote-as 65200
neighbor 172.25.84.102 peer-group IBGP_AS65200
neighbor 172.25.84.102 fall-over
neighbor 172.25.84.102 activate
Transit Router R2
router bgp 65000
!
address-family ipv4 vrf VRF_AS65200
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 peer-group
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 local-as 65200
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 description IBGP to 65200 iBGP
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 timers 3 10
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 send-community
neighbor IBGP_AS65200 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 172.25.84.101 remote-as 65200
neighbor 172.25.84.101 peer-group IBGP_AS65200
neighbor 172.25.84.101 fall-over
neighbor 172.25.84.101 activate
I tried forming the iBGP peering by removing the local-as parameter, but the neighborship fails to establish because without the local-as parameter, the routers advertise that their local AS is 65000 (global BGP process AS number).
I have successfully managed to establish the iBGP peering and exchange routing information by specifying the remote-as as 65000. When I check the AS Path on the upstream routers the AS Path looks correct. Although this works, this configuration seems a little strange in the fact that you need to specify the remote-as as the global AS process number, even though you want to peer on a different AS.
The other method that seems to work is to use route reflectors, but this seems pointless when the iBGP relationship is only between two peers.
I can't find anything in the support documentation that describes this issue and how to fix it, unless you are using IOS-XE.
Both routers are WS-C6506-E running s72033-ipservicesk9-mz.122-33.SXI4a.bin
Any help greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Paul
... View more
- Tags:
- #BGP#VRF
Labels:
06-14-2013
04:30 AM
Hi Tony, What image is running on the 3560s? HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-14-2013
04:15 AM
Hi Donald, I'm not familiar with the network simulator labs for ICND1, what software are you using for the lab environment? Normally you would be able to select the device you want to configure by selecting the device on a network map or similar. Do you have a feature like this in the lab? HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-14-2013
04:06 AM
No worries, at least you got a quick resolution from BT and you're operational again HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-10-2013
12:13 AM
Bridge A only has an ALTN port whilst it continues to hear Hello-BPDUs from the root bridge. If A doesn't hear any Hello-BPDUs for the max-age time it assumes the root is no longer reachable on that port. HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-09-2013
11:36 AM
No worries Depending on the model it may support VRRP, which is a non-proprietary alternative to HSRP. Cisco routers support VRRP as well, so the same can solution can be applied using VRRP instead. HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-09-2013
11:30 AM
Hi Alexey, I just read this document and this is what I understand to happen. Bridge A invalidates the information about R because X has declared itself root. Bridge A will no longer receive information from R because R has failed, therefore it can not be considered the root bridge. Due to the time it takes for RSTP information to propagate through the clouds, bridge A only hears root election information from X, so it believes X is root. It takes time for the root information from Y to propagate to A, and by the time A receives the root election information from Y, it already believes X is root. Does that answer your question? HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-09-2013
09:42 AM
Hi, You should be able to configure the router to send an SNMP trap on restart. You can configure the SNMP collector to email when an SNMP cold start trap is received. Obviously you'd need a management station running some SNMP software for this to work. You may be able to achieve the same result using syslog, but I'm not sure if syslog would be sent on startup. HTH Paul Sent from Cisco Technical Support Android App
... View more
06-09-2013
09:21 AM
Hi, You're using PPP chap authentication but I don't see any usernames specified in your configuration. Have you omitted these for the post? Thanks, Sent from Cisco Technical Support Android App
... View more
06-09-2013
07:00 AM
Hi Chris, You can do the following: Repatch the firewall to port Gi0/0/0 Connect the server to Gi0/0/1 Configure the IP of Gi0/0 on a vlan Assign the interfaces Gi0/0/0 and Gi0/0/1 to the vlan For example: ! interface Gi0/0 no ip address no ip nat inside ! ! interface vlan 10 ip address 50.55.X.1 255.255.255.248 ip nat inside no shut ! ! interface Gi0/0/0 switchport mode access switchport access vlan 10 no shut ! ! interface Gi0/0/1 swit chport mode access switchport access vlan 10 no shut ! This will put both devices on the same network where they can reach 50.55.x.1 to be able to get out to the Internet HTH Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
06-09-2013
01:38 AM
Hi Graham, Do you have confirmation that the IP addresses at the old site are going to be transferred to the new site? Has a date been set for the transfer? If I was in your situation I would look to put the spare watchguard in at the old site. This will maintain the NAT translations for your external services and get you back up and running. As your environment is working again you have two options based on whether the IP addresses are gong to be transferred. 1. Arrange a date and time for the IP transfer to take place. Disable the old watchguard and enable the new one. I should think that for the IPs to transfer it will be a cut off service at the old site rather than a staged migration. 2. If the IPs are not being transferred then you have an environment where you can migrate services from the old BTNet service to the new one in a controlled manner. I would monitor the hit counters on the watchguard to identify what services are being used. Start working on creating the new NAT translations on the watchguard at the new site. For seamless transition to new the new IPs you can arrange with your ISP to lower the TTL of the DNS records to a value of seconds. Do this at least 24hrs before you want to change the IP of the record so that the TTL has time to propagate. When you come to update the IP in DNS you will only lose service for a matter of seconds before the cached record expires on the client and a new record is requested. It seems like you can get a temporary fix up and running using the spare watchguard. I would be wary of how long the old BTNet service will run for. You need confirmation that BT are not going to switch this off or change the config without your permission otherwise you will have a large problem! HTH Sent from Cisco Technical Support Android App
... View more
06-08-2013
01:50 PM
Hi Chris, Can you post the config of the 2901? Make sure you remove any passwords and sensitive information. Thanks, Paul ****Please rate useful posts****
... View more
07-06-2015
Hi Vinit, On the production switches where I have the issue the bgp
router-id is defined under the a...
07-06-2015
Hi Simon,I would recommend redistributing the BGP learned default route
into OSPF, and influencing t...
07-06-2015
Hi, Can anyone advise on the best practice/recommended method for
creating iBGP peers between VRF's ...
06-14-2013
Hi Donald,I'm not familiar with the network simulator labs for ICND1,
what software are you using fo...
06-14-2013
No worries, at least you got a quick resolution from BT and you're
operational again HTH Paul ****Pl...
06-10-2013
Bridge A only has an ALTN port whilst it continues to hear Hello-BPDUs
from the root bridge.If A doe...
06-09-2013
No worries Depending on the model it may support VRRP, which is a
non-proprietary alternative to HSR...
06-09-2013
Hi Alexey,I just read this document and this is what I understand to
happen.Bridge A invalidates the...
06-09-2013
Hi,You should be able to configure the router to send an SNMP trap on
restart. You can configure the...
06-09-2013
Hi,You're using PPP chap authentication but I don't see any usernames
specified in your configuratio...
06-09-2013
Hi Chris,You can do the following:Repatch the firewall to port
Gi0/0/0Connect the server to Gi0/0/1C...
06-09-2013
Hi Graham,Do you have confirmation that the IP addresses at the old site
are going to be transferred...
Public Statistics
| Date Registered | 10-24-2007 03:50 AM |
| Date Last Visited | 10-16-2017 07:09 AM |
| Total Messages Posted | 165 |
| Total Helpful Votes Received | 87 |
Helpful Votes Given To
| User | Helpful Count |
|---|---|
| 4 | |
| 4 | |
| 9 | |
| 4 | |
| 3 |
.jpg "VIP Expert"){kind=icon}
