On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Ross Vandegrift <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 10:57:39AM -0600, Cory Ayers wrote: > > Have you looked at using two interfaces to loop traffic with one > > interface in the global table and one in the VRF? You could run two > > different OSPF processes to transport routes between assuming you > > only need a default inside the VRF. > > Yep that's the key - it just hit me that if I run two OSPF processes > in the global table. Use one just for redistribution of routes into > iBGP and use the other for my actual IGP. > > Thanks, > Ross > > My .02 is that you should put everything in VRF's (even the global table) and use route-target import/export and import maps (if required) to control routing domains. Question - can you use 'neighbor allowas-in' instead of as-override? I'm not sure why your BGP AS-PATH was wrong in scenario #3 above - but I'm using that in a very similar scenario in my lab to solve the problem of having the same eBGP AS used at 2 different sites connected to 2 different PE routers. BGP won't advertise a path it receives w/ it's own ASN in the path http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_3t/mpls/command/reference/mp_n5gt.html#wp1007547 Kenny _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
