What does a 'show ip cef detail' return for those?
On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 7:15 PM, Howard Leadmon <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, and in my terrible lack of sleep maybe I am missing something that I > shouldn't be, but here is the issue.. > > > > I have a 7606 with RSP720's running IOS 15.3(3)S6 at this time. Across the > Ashburn exchange they use the IP block of 206.126.236.0/22 for peering. > If I > look at the router and ask it for the routing for this block I see: > > > > #sho ip route 206.126.236.0 > > Routing entry for 206.126.236.0/22, supernet > > Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0 (connected, via interface) > > Routing Descriptor Blocks: > > * directly connected, via Vlan99 > > Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 > > > > > > My IP in use on the exchange is 206.126.237.136 > > > > So if I run a show route on a few peers we connect with, I would expect it > to > fall inside the above supernet, and if they are in .236, .238, or .239 they > do, but not if they are part of .237. As an example: > > > > #sho ip route 206.126.236.37 > > Routing entry for 206.126.236.0/22, supernet > > Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0 (connected, via interface) > > Routing Descriptor Blocks: > > * directly connected, via Vlan99 > > > > > > .236 is good.. > > > > #sho ip route 206.126.237.37 > > % Subnet not in table > > > > .237 is bad.. > > > > #sho ip route 206.126.238.37 > > Routing entry for 206.126.236.0/22, supernet > > Known via "connected", distance 0, metric 0 (connected, via interface) > > Routing Descriptor Blocks: > > * directly connected, via Vlan99 > > > > .238 is good, as well at .239.. > > > > If I look at the routes I see the router seems to be injecting a local /32 > which doesn't make a lot of sense to me either: > > > > #sho ip route 206.126.237.0 > > Routing entry for 206.126.237.0/32, 1 known subnets > > Attached (1 connections) > > L 206.126.237.136 is directly connected, Vlan99 > > > > This is causing connection issues for some of the peers for sure, and a > static route for the /24 will add it to the routing table, I am at a total > lost as to why it's not already present with the /22 in the table, and with > the fact the interface to the IX shows with a mask of 255.255.252.0. All > of > my IPv6 is great, just this one issue with IPv4 driving me batty. > > > > Any suggestions or advice most welcome.. > > > > > > --- > > Howard Leadmon > > PBW Communications, LLC > > <http://www.pbwcomm.com> http://www.pbwcomm.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/
