Hi, On 10/24/2011 12:40, Michael Chomicz wrote:
> hi andrey - not sure if you've resolved your issue - you showed 2 BGP paths > in 2 different routers right? (both are called 'spring' and are in AS 65036??) Yes, there are 2 different routers in AS 65036, one receives these prefixes, the other (spring) re-advertises them into regional VPN. > route that works (from the OTHER router): >> spring#sh ip bgp 10.36.72.32 >> BGP routing table entry for 10.36.72.32/27, version 603507 >> Paths: (1 available, best #1, table Default-IP-Routing-Table) >> Advertised to update-groups: >> 1 >> 21017 44237 30835, (received & used) >> 10.36.2.22 (metric 3072) from 213.129.126.1 (10.36.1.1) >> Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, best >> Originator: 10.36.1.4, Cluster list: 10.36.1.1 > my confusion here is : the AS you're trying to advertise 10.36.72.32/27 to is > AS 21017?? ... based on this AS path (of this other 'spring' router - it > looks like it is already coming from AS 21017 into AS 65036 - so i'm thinking > that AS 21017 already has the route through a shorter path (AS 44237) There are different VRFs, so while incoming path can include AS 21017, the prefixes aren't known yet to the neighbor with the same AS. > who is in update-group 1? (sh ip bgp update-group 1) > i think a clearer picture/re-investigation of the BGP topology would bring > some results - especially if the filters are having no effect All problems seem to be resolved today with switching IOS versions (from 12.4.25d to 12.4.24T6). Thanks for helping, Andrey _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
