On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:29:29PM +0000, Andy Litzinger wrote:
> I can create a routing-instance for each group (or 1 and use the global table
> for the other). Adding the RVIs and maintaining a separate default route out
> for each routing-instance is no problem. The trouble is trying to allow the
> subnets to communicate to each other.
>
> I've tried adding a static route under the routing-instance for Group 1 to a
> subnet outside the routing-instance, e.g. a route to subnet C inside
> routing-instance for Group1, but the route never shows up in the routing
> table, presumably because there isn't a live interface in routing-instance C
> with a connection to subnet C. and it doesn't look like there's an option to
> make the next-hop an interface instead of an IP.
> I will try rib groups next, but I think I read somewhere that EX switches
> don't support importing static routes via rib groups.
The Junos-way is to use rib-groups to copy direct (interface) routes
between routing-instances. Static routes shouldn't be necessary. I
don't know if there are limitations on EX.
routing-options {
interface-routes {
rib-group {
inet IF-RIB;
}
}
rib-groups {
IF-RIB {
import-rib [ inet.0 VRF-A.inet.0 VRF-B.inet.0 ];
}
}
}
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
