Ooops, I was referring to another thread (EBGP policy JNCIP-M). My bad, sorry! My question was regarding the JNCIP-M study guide..Anyways, this "old mare" seems to be timeless ;) Thanks for prompt answer!
Adam On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 9:53 PM, Harry Reynolds <[email protected]> wrote: > No, but there is some newer enterprise stuff that can help freshen the > old mare a bit I suppose. ;) > > Thanks. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Tajer [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:41 PM > To: Harry Reynolds; juniper-nsp > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Missing BGP Routes > > By the way...Harry, are there any plans to release a 2nd edition of this > classic book? > > Thanks, > Adam > > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Harry Reynolds <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Cool. Note that keep-all should have left them hidden in rib-in, > which > can assist in troubleshooting such issues. > > Regards > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Van Tol [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:03 PM > To: Harry Reynolds; juniper-nsp > Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Missing BGP Routes > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Harry Reynolds [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:46 PM > > To: Eric Van Tol; juniper-nsp > > Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Missing BGP Routes > > > > Normally an as path loop or other sanity check results in this > state. > > From the config below does not seem this is the case. Perhaps > add > > keep-all, restart/soft clear session, and then display hidden. > Perhaps > > > something will jump out. > > > > Does tracing show any errors when the routes are processed? > > Unreachable next hop normally is just hidden so does not seem > the case > > > here. Should not matter, but I normally doe not specify > peer-as for an > int group. > > Again should not break things but worth trying w/o. > > > > So, I tried tracing again and you all were correct. There was a > BGP > group on edge01 with the cluster-id of 192.168.206.129, which > was > causing the route to drop. I believe my problem with tracing > was that I > was not tracing the right information and using a prefix filter > under > the 'route' flag. > > Thanks to all who responded. I now know that routes with > cluster-id > issues will be dropped with no addition to the RIB. > > -evt > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > > > -- Adam Tajer home: 0048.22.382.1096 mobile: 0048.605.222.083 http://www.linkedin.com/in/adamtajer _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
