On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 09:42:24PM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote: > Ondrej, > > --On 29 September 2011 22:50:25 +0200 Ondrej Zajicek > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> BTW, there is a similar (but mostly harmless) bug not related to NSSA - >> if an interface appears and there is a static route configured that goes >> through that iface, the static protocol receives the iface notification >> and generates the route, which is propagated to an ospf protocol before >> the iface notification, so gw is not found and the route is propagated >> without one. > > That sounds like it might be what I'm seeing (see mail entitled > "Directly connected interface redistribution problem" - yes I will > get you the debug output you wanted, the test environment got > rebuilt before I could get it), as what we're doing is redistributing > static routes. > > Do you have a fix I could try?
May be, but in my case the route is propagated, just without explicit forwarding address (so the propagating router is used as one, which is OK). I don't have a proper fix for that, it is a bit tricky problem. For a workaround it might help to reorder protocols in config file (OSPF before static, you can check in log file whether OSPF gets iface notifications before static). -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'SanTiago' Zajicek (email: [email protected]) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
