[nsp] BGP filter issue

Sean Mathias seanm at prosolve.com
Fri Jan 30 10:56:34 EST 2004


What would be an example of the networks for both remote clients the
fail and succeed?  Maybe include a sh ip bgp x.x.x.x for the networks as
well.  I will be traveling all day and will not be back on email until
tomorrow.

Sean Mathias
CCIE #12779
206-920-0301
seanm at prosolve.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Alban Dani [mailto:adani at stevens.edu] 
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:19 AM
To: Sean Mathias
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [nsp] BGP filter issue


Hi Sean,

Here is some of the output from the command you suggested.
This output is taken from another router that has the same filter
applied. For the moment I can not put the filter back on the original
router.

router#sh ip bgp regexp   ^19262 [0-9]+$
BGP table version is 79535136, local router ID is xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx Status
codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete

   Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 128.6.0.0        130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 46 i
*> 128.235.0.0      130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 4246
i
*> 128.235.160.0/20 130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 4246
i
*> 128.235.240.0/23 130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 4246
i
*> 130.68.0.0/17    130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 205 i
*> 130.68.128.0/18  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 205 i
*> 130.68.192.0/19  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 205 i
*> 130.156.17.0/24  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 18794
i
*> 130.156.142.0/23 130.156.250.93        2654             0 19262 26635
i
*> 130.156.144.0/22 130.156.250.93        2654             0 19262 26635
i
*> 130.156.148.0/24 130.156.250.93        2654             0 19262 26635
i
*> 130.219.0.0/19   130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
?
*> 130.219.0.0      130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
i
*> 130.219.32.0/21  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
?
*> 130.219.40.0/21  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
?
*> 130.219.48.0/20  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
?
*> 130.219.64.0/19  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
?
*> 130.219.96.0/20  130.156.250.93           0             0 19262 11094
?

Thanks for your help,

Alban 

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Sean Mathias
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 5:48 PM
To: Alban Dani; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [nsp] BGP filter issue

With the filter in place, can you look at the output of show ip bgp
regexp ^19262 [0-9]+$ to see if it is matching as you expected it to?  

Sean Mathias
CCIE #12779
206-920-0301
seanm at prosolve.com


-----Original Message-----
From: Alban Dani [mailto:adani at stevens.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 1:14 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [nsp] BGP filter issue


Hello,

 

Recently I experienced a weird issue with our internet connection.

 

We have a Cisco 7200 connected to our ISP ( Verizon).

A month ago we applied a bgp filter on the inbound that would accept bgp
routing updates only from our neighbor AS and the one next to it.

 

ip as-path access-list 6 permit ^19262$

ip as-path access-list 6 permit ^19262 [0-9]+$

ip as-path access-list 6 deny .*

 

Last week we started having issues with the internet connection for
several employees that connected remotely to our network. After some
research we figured that people that were connected to ISP-s that were
no more then two AS hops from us were having the problem ( and we could
find their networks in the bgp table ). On the other hand people who
were more then two AS hops away were just fine. Their networks could not
be found in the bgp table (as excpected  because of the filter ) and
they were taking the default route outside.

 

We took the filter out today and everything is back to normal.

 

Can anybody explain this? Is it a bug? A design flow? Is it the ISP?

 

 

Thanks in advance

 

Alban 

 

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/




More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list