Yes, that is right. outbound prefixes are based on prefix-list filter that has been configured. Same prefix-list has been set on other UP Links and BGP session works fine, really strange.
I have set max-prefix at maximum value because i am receiving full BGP table. On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:38 PM, Jason Lixfeld <[email protected]> wrote: > max-prefix isn't an outbound mechanism, it's in inbound one. Setting max > prefix on a neighbor won't prevent it from announcing a zillion prefixes to > that neighbor, it will only prevent that session from receiving a zillion > prefixes from the neighbor where the max prefix setting is configured. > > That detail output for Prefixes advertised has nothing to do with the > total number of prefixes advertised to that neighbour at the time the > command was run. I think it just tells you how many prefixes it's > announced throughout the lifetime of the session. I think that number > will increment anytime a prefix is added for whatever reason (downstream > link flap, static route removal, whatever). > > On 2013-04-09, at 4:27 PM, Ahmed Hilmy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello Jason, > > thanks for your reply, i know that it clear but why this is happened, > the filter has been set on both side identical. > > Kindly, find below log, > > # sh bgp neighbor x.x.x.x detail | i Prefix advertised > > > > Prefix advertised 2735, suppressed 0, withdrawn 1855, maximum limit > 524288 > > > > #sh bgp neighbor x.x.x.x advertised-routes > > > > i count the number of advertised prefixes are only 215 > > > > Neighbor x.x.x.x is my UP Link, Prefix list filter has been configured > to allow a specific prefixes to be announced. > > > > What do you think ? > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Jason Lixfeld <[email protected]> wrote: > > The message is pretty clear. x.x.x.x is announcing more prefixes than > what your max prefix setting is configured for. Either the uplink side is > misconfigured or your max prefix setting is too small. > > > > On 2013-04-09, at 4:13 PM, Ahmed Hilmy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Dear Friends, > > > > > > Recently i have faced a strange issue, BGP session with my UP Links > goes > > > down due this log at UP Link side: > > > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:Apr 8 13:10:54.818 : bgp[1044]: > %ROUTING-BGP-4-MAXPFXEXCEED > > > : No. of IPv4 Unicast prefixes received from x.x.x.x: 401 exceed limit > 400 > > > > > > RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:Apr 8 13:10:54.818 : bgp[1044]: > %ROUTING-BGP-5-ADJCHANGE : > > > neighbor x.x.x.x Down - Peer exceeding maximum prefix limit (CEASE > > > notification sent - maximum n umber of prefixes reached) > (VRF: > > > default) > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > # sh bgp neighbor x.x.x.x detail | i Prefix advertised > > > > > > Prefix advertised 2735, suppressed 0, withdrawn 1855, maximum limit > 524288 > > > #sh bgp neighbor x.x.x.x advertised-routes > > > > > > i count the number of advertised prefixes are only 215 > > > > > > So what Prefix advertised 2735 does it mean ? > > > Why i faced this issue with my UP Links , it happened sometime , if i > have > > > configured BGP filter in wrong way so i have to face this > > > issue continuously. > > > > > > Any suggest plan to check ? > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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/
