What does the routing table for the customer VRF look like on the PE? Do you see the external routes advertised by its neighboring CE?
-Yuri On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:49 AM, Joe Maimon <[email protected]> wrote: > Perhaps something like this shows what I ran into better - I'll have to try > and see if I can build it in a lab. > > The CE would not see the connected routes of the other CE's, unless a > network statement is used instead of redistribute connected. > > CE#1 > > hostname cust1-ce1 > int l0 > ip address 10.255.255.255 255.255.255.255 > ! > int fa0/0 > ip address 10.1.1.0 255.255.255.0 > ! > int s0/0 > ip address 172.16.0.1 255.255.255.252 > ! > router eigrp 100 > redistribute connected > network 172.16.0.0 0.0.0.255 > no auto-summary > > > PE#1 > > ip vrf cust1 > rd 65000:1 > route-target export 65000:1 > route-target import 65000:1 > ! > int l0 > ip address 1.0.0.0 255.255.255.255 > ! > int fa0/0 > ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0 > mpls ldp discovery transport-address interface > mpls label protocol ldp > mpls ip > mpls mtu 1548 > ! > int s0/0 > desc cust1-ce1 > ip vrf for cust1 > ip address 172.16.0.2 255.255.255.252 > ! > router ospf 1 > network 1.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0.0.0.0 > ! > router eigrp 1 > passive-interface default > no passive-interface s0/0 > ! > address-family ipv4 vrf cust1 > redistribute bgp 65000 metric 6000 100 255 100 1500 > network 172.16.0.0 0.0.0.255 > autonomous-system 100 > no auto-summry > eigrp router-id 172.16.0.2 > ! > router bgp 65000 > neighbor 1.0.0.1 remote-as 65000 > neighbor 1.0.0.1 update-source loopback0 > ! > address-family ipv4 > neighbor 1.0.0.1 send-community both > ! > address-family vpnv4 > neighbor 1.0.0.1 send-community extended > ! > address-family ipv4 vrf cust1 > redistribute eigrp 100 > no synchronization > ! > > > PE#2 > > > ip vrf cust1 > rd 65000:1 > route-target export 65000:1 > route-target import 65000:1 > ! > int l0 > ip address 1.0.0.1 255.255.255.255 > ! > int fa0/0 > ip address 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.0 > mpls ldp discovery transport-address interface > mpls label protocol ldp > mpls ip > mpls mtu 1548 > ! > int s0/0 > desc cust1-ce2 > ip vrf for cust1 > ip address 172.16.0.6 255.255.255.252 > ! > router ospf 1 > network 1.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 0.0.0.0 > ! > router eigrp 1 > passive-interface default > no passive-interface s0/0 > ! > address-family ipv4 vrf cust1 > redistribute bgp 65000 metric 6000 100 255 100 1500 > network 172.16.0.0 0.0.0.255 > autonomous-system 100 > no auto-summry > eigrp router-id 172.16.0.6 > ! > router bgp 65000 > neighbor 1.0.0.2 remote-as 65000 > neighbor 1.0.0.2 update-source loopback0 > ! > address-family ipv4 > neighbor 1.0.0.2 send-community both > ! > address-family vpnv4 > neighbor 1.0.0.2 send-community extended > ! > address-family ipv4 vrf cust1 > redistribute eigrp 100 > no synchronization > > CE#2 > > > > hostname cust1-ce2 > int l0 > ip address 10.255.255.0 255.255.255.255 > ! > int fa0/0 > ip address 10.1.255.0 255.255.255.0 > ! > int s0/0 > ip address 172.16.0.5 255.255.255.252 > ! > router eigrp 100 > redistribute connected > network 172.16.0.0 0.0.0.255 > no auto-summary > > > > > > Luan Nguyen wrote: > >> Just put this into Dynamips and didn't have any problem at all. >> >> CE1# >> router eigrp 1 >> no auto-summary >> ! >> address-family ipv4 vrf BLUE >> redistribute bgp 1 metric 1 1 1 1 1 >> network 10.10.10.254 0.0.0.0 >> no auto-summary >> autonomous-system 1 >> exit-address-family >> >> PE1# >> router eigrp 1 >> no auto-summary >> ! >> address-family ipv4 vrf BLUE >> network 10.10.10.254 0.0.0.0 >> no auto-summary >> autonomous-system 1 >> exit-address-family >> >> >> router bgp 1 >> ! >> address-family ipv4 vrf BLUE >> redistribute eigrp 1 >> no auto-summary >> no synchronization >> exit-address-family >> >> Maybe check the EIGRP configuration to see if you have thing like eigrp >> stub >> connected :) >> >> ------------------------------------- >> Luan Nguyen >> Chesapeake NetCraftsmen, LLC. >> ------------------------------------- >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Maimon >> Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 8:19 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Redistributing External EIGRP routes through MPLS vpn >> >> Metric Must Be Configured for Routes from Other Autonomous Systems and >> Non-EIGRP Networks >> >> Yes, it is. >> >> Native EIGRP VRF to VRF Redistribution Is Not Supported >> >> Not what I am trying to do. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Joe >> >> Shimol Shah wrote: >> >>> Are you sure you are not running into restriction cited in below section >>> of the CCO document ? >>> >>> >>> >> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2t/12_2t15/feature/guide/fteipece.htm >> l#wp1027175 >> >>> >>> >>> Shimol Shah >>> >>> >>> On 5/17/10 2:57 PM, Joe Maimon wrote: >>> >>>> Hey All, >>>> >>>> Seems like I have run into a difficulty where CE#1 external EIGRP routes >>>> (redistribute connected/redistribute static) are learned by PE#1, >>>> redistributed to PE#2, but not redistributed to CE#2 >>>> >>>> CE<-> PE, EIGRP >>>> >>>> PE<-> PE, MPLS/BGP >>>> >>>> The workaround is to use network statements, making the EIGRP routes on >>>> the CE internal. Those redistribute fine and show up on CE#2 as >>>> internal. >>>> >>>> Am I missing something and is there a simple clean way to redistribute >>>> from CE#1 to CE#2 external EIGRP routes? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Joe >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >> >> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >> signature >> database 5123 (20100518) __________ >> >> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. >> >> http://www.eset.com >> >> >> >> >> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >> signature >> database 5123 (20100518) __________ >> >> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. >> >> http://www.eset.com >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
