[c-nsp] Source address on BGP peering set up

[Brian Feeny]

I can understand that you are doing a migration from one network to  
another.
However, there are probably easier ways of doing this.  Migrate the  
network, and then
later migrate the BGP neighbors, in other words, leave them numbered  
out of legacy space
until the last thing.

or

Use a loopback address on the Cisco, number that out of the new IP  
space, or just some other
IP space, and use that as the update-source.

Brian

On Jan 17, 2005, at 10:27 AM, Piltrafilla wrote:

> Hi people,
>
> First of all, thank you for all your replies, I'm sorry for the delay
> in my answer.
>
> With your feedback I have tried a BGP peering on my home lab between a
> Cisco and OpenBSD bgpd:
>
> Cisco
>   primary 10.0.0.1
>   secondary 192.168.0.1
> OpenBSD
>  primary 10.0.0.2
>  secondary 192.168.0.2
>
> On OpenBSD bgpd configuration I have set up local-address for peer  
> 10.0.0.1:
>
>    neighbor 10.0.0.1
>    {
>        local-address           10.0.0.2
>        remote-as                65500
>    }
>
> After configuration on both sides, I did a clear ip bgp 192.168.0.2 on
> the Cisco side to force reestablishing the peering as a client
> (ephemeral to 179). That's the tcpdump on the OpenBSD side:
>
> 10.0.0.1.15357 > 192.168.0.2.179: S 2018010072:2018010072(0) win 16384
> 10.0.0.1.15357 > 192.168.0.2.179: S 2018010072:2018010072(0) win 16384
>
> Although Cisco router has a connected secondary IP to peer
> 192.168.0.2, Cisco tries to set up the peering with the primary
> address.
>
> A few seconds later, OpenBSD successfully establishes peering with the
> Cisco box as a client (ephemeral to 179) because of the possibility of
> configuring local-address:
>
> 192.168.0.2.46380 > 192.168.0.1.179: S 957503115:957503115(0) win 65535
> 192.168.0.1.179 > 192.168.0.2.46380: S 949964186:949964186(0) ack
> 957503116 win 16384
> 192.168.0.2.46380 > 192.168.0.1.179: . ack 1 win 65535
> 192.168.0.2.46380 > 192.168.0.1.179: P 1:40(39) ack 1 win 65535 : BGP
> [|BGP OPEN] (DF) [tos 0xc0]
>
> I know that for many of you, this config could seem in someway really
> stupid. That config was thought for a temporary peer migration not for
> a definitive config.
>
> Any comments on the results?
>
> Take Care,
>
> -- Carlos
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:34:32 +0000 (GMT), Stephen J. Wilcox
> <steve at telecomplete.co.uk> wrote:
>> I thought I'd chip in as everyone else has had a go at this..
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005, Piltrafilla wrote:
>>
>>> Anyone knows how BGP on a Cisco router choose source IP address for  
>>> peering
>>> establishment if no "update-source" command is applied to neighbor?  
>>> Is it only
>>> the primary IP address on the closest interface to neighbor?
>>
>> update-source will use the primary address, if no update source is  
>> applied it
>> will use the ip on the outgoing interface
>>
>>> For instance, let's say that you would like to set up a peering  
>>> using a
>>> secondary IP address to between two directly-connected neighbors. Is  
>>> it
>>> setting up loopbacks, static /32 routes and update-source on the  
>>> neighbors'
>>> config the only way to do it?
>>
>> no you can just config it like any other ebgp directly connected peer
>>
>>> On bgpd of OpenBSD you could set up a "local-address" parameter per
>>> neighbor or group that sets up source IP address used for that
>>> peering. I haven't found any similar parameter on cisco bgp  
>>> neighbors'
>>> config.
>>
>> it doesnt have it
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------
Brian Feeny, CCIE #8036, CISSP    	e: signal at shreve.net
Network Engineer           			p: 318.213.4709
ShreveNet Inc.             			f: 318.221.6612