Hello Dragan, What is your concern please? -If everything is working. I mean as soon as you removed the static you did indeed see the route via ISIS from the remote router installed in the RIB and I'm confident you can see both LSPs (local and remote) containing the route in the local ISIS LSDB. What would be the point of having the route in RIB as inactive please? If you'll enable LFA I'm sure you'll see the remote router as an alternate for the prefix programed in RIB and FIB for that matter.
adam > -----Original Message----- > From: juniper-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Dragan Jovicic > Sent: 05 February 2015 23:51 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [j-nsp] IS-IS not installing route into RIB > > Hello. > > We have two routers in ISP network exporting identical static routes to > IS-IS; all routers install static route to closest of the two routers. > Those two routes do not install route received over IS-IS as inactive into > inet.0 table. > > Only when one of the two routers deletes its static route, is route from > IS-IS installed into IS-IS RIB and in routing table. > > Could anyone shed a light on this - is this expected behavior? Shouldn't > both routers install two routes as inactive into inet.0 table? > > Regards > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
