[c-nsp] weird EIGRP problem

[Bruce Pinsky]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Burton Windle wrote:

| I have a Cisco 831 router with a client-mode VPN to a remote network. The
| 831 is directly connected to one of my 6509's, we'll call it 6509-2. I
| have another 6509, 6509-1, that is directly connected to 6509-2.
|
| Both 6509's exchange routes via EIGRP, and they both redistribute static.
|
| If I add a static route on 6509-2 for the remote network, pointing
| next-hop to the 831's inside interface, 6509-2 can ping the remote network
| with zero packet loss. However, 6509-1 gets about 90% packet loss to the
| same IP on the remote network, but it does show the remote network in a
| 'sh ip route'.
|
| If I remove the static route from 6509-2 and put it on 6509-1, then 6509-1
| can ping with 100% success, and 6509-2 gets mostly failures.
|
| If they both have the static route (which they shouldn't need, if EIGRP is
| redistributing static) they can both ping.
|
| No matter what, nothing else on my network can ping said remote network
| besides these 6509s, even tho all other routers see the route.
|
| Can somebody hit me with a cluestick as to what I'm doing wrong? Does this
| sound like an IOS bug (6509s both run 12.1(8b)E6).
|
|


Have you tried looking at "debug ip icmp" on the 831 to see if the packets
are reaching it?  What does a traceroute show?  If it fails, at what point?
~ Could this be a return path problem instead?

- --
=========
bep

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFBL4JEE1XcgMgrtyYRAs6vAKDJyRBVkFfBFkVBUes3WiDso+nfGQCgn3ki
7ULia2iwoqVvFuHlP0oAhAQ=
=pfp9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----