Hello, Path inconsistencies are to be expected, as BGP will only advertise the best routes. Depending on your setup and requirements, you may want to look at advertise-best-external, if you want external routes from both routers to be in the BGP tables.
Prefixes showing up in only one router is kind of weird though. Can you verify that by checking for an exact route ? PS : You could have pastebinned "sh ip bgp" as well ;) My thoughts and words are my own. Kind Regards, Spyros -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of David Deutsch Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 4:40 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [c-nsp] Full Routes / iBGP Issue & Question Hello all, Please excuse my disorganized posting/question, as this is my first posting to the mailing list. Currently I am attempting to implement two ASR1002-X routers on my network edge, each with diverse eBGP provider connections receiving full routes. Everything up to a point has gone very well, including reception of full routes, blocking of default routes, local prefs, etc. However I am getting some odd results when iBGP connecting the two together. I appears that certain routes from each other are being filtered out, so each router is in some cases aware of both routes to a prefix and in some cases aware of only one. Examples: edge01.las.telna.com#show ip bgp ... *> 1.2.128.0/19 216.115.65.69 80 0 23005 701 38040 9737 i * i 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i * i 1.2.128.0/18 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i *> 216.115.65.69 80 0 23005 701 38040 9737 i * i 1.2.128.0/17 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i *> 216.115.65.69 80 0 23005 19151 38040 9737 i *>i 1.2.160.0/19 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i * 216.115.65.69 80 0 23005 19151 10026 38040 9737 i *>i 1.2.179.0/24 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 9737 23969 i *>i 1.2.180.0/24 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 9737 23969 i *>i 1.2.183.0/24 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 9737 23969 i *>i 1.2.192.0/19 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i *>i 1.2.192.0/18 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i *>i 1.2.224.0/19 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i * i 1.3.0.0/24 10.110.5.21 0 80 0 22911 174 10026 18046 i edge02.las.telna.com#show ip bgp *> 1.0.128.0/19 199.189.118.149 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i * i 1.0.128.0/18 10.110.5.11 0 80 0 23005 3356 38040 9737 i *> 199.189.118.149 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i * i 1.0.128.0/17 10.110.5.11 0 80 0 23005 19151 38040 9737 9737 i *> 199.189.118.149 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 9737 i * i 1.0.129.0/24 10.110.5.11 0 80 0 23005 19151 38040 9737 9737 9737 23969 i *> 199.189.118.149 80 0 22911 174 38040 9737 9737 9737 23969 i *> 1.0.160.0/19 199.189.118.149 80 0 22911 22822 38040 9737 i What I don't completely understand is why, when the two ASRs are in a iBGP relationship, some routes are showing on one unit and not the other. Additionally, routes like 1.2.128.0/19 will show both paths on one and not on the other. edge01 show ip bgp neigh: http://pastebin.com/uv37gsmm edge02 show ip bgp neigh: http://pastebin.com/Q9SiK1ZZ edge01 bgp config: http://pastebin.com/rLRDTbDj edge02 bgp config: http://pastebin.com/apsPLt3D Any help would be highly appreciated! --David Deutsch _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ This e-mail and any attachment(s) contained within are confidential and are intended only for the use of the individual to whom they are addressed. The information contained in this communication may be privileged, or exempt from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete the communication without retaining any copies. Rolaware Hellas SA is not responsible for, nor endorses, any opinion, recommendation, conclusion, solicitation, offer or agreement or any information contained in this communication. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
