[c-nsp] EIGRP vs BGP route selection

[Luan Nguyen]

You have to have EIGRP redistribute into BGP as well?
Once in the BGP table, local redistribute routes will have a weight of 32768
which will be prefered over the EBGP weight of 0.  I remember reading over
at the Netpro forum and someone said that it's a racing condition:  EIGRP
converge faster and get there first.
You either does the TAC suggestion or you could use route-map to set things
to influence EIGRP redistributed routes to lower priority.  But you have to
do it though.
If you don't do anything and just clear eigrp and the BGP route get in the
routing table, later if that link fails, EIGRP will be in there and won't
get out even if the link comes back up.

-lmn

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Uddin, Tahir <
tahir.uddin at alliancebernstein.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I am summarizing an issue I am seeing, wondering if anyone might have
> some input on this.
>
> In the following topology, I have a floating static route (distance 250)
> redistributed into EIGRP on R1 which sends the redistributed route to R2
> which sends it to R3. R4 sees the EIGRP route from R3 and an EBGP route
> from R4. I would have thought that R3 would pick the EBGP route since
> EBGP as a protocol has a admin distance of 20 as opposed to the EIGRP
> admin distance of 170 but I see the EIGRP route in the routing table of
> R3. Based on TACs recommendation, we ended up using a route map that
> applies a higher weight to the EBGP route to make it more preferable.
> Shouldn't R3 use the EBGP route by default because it has lower admin
> distance compared to redistributed EIGRP.
>
>
>
>                                    Static                EIGRP
> EIGRP              EBGP
>
> 10.10.10.0/24
> -------------------------R1------------------------R2-------------------
> -R3------------------------R4-----------10.10.10.0/24
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> The information contained in this transmission may be privileged and
> confidential and is intended only for the use of the person(s) named
> above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
> responsible
> for delivering this message to the intended recipient, any review,
> dissemination,
> distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited.
> If you are
> not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by reply
> e-mail
> and destroy all copies of the original message. Please note that we do not
> accept
> account orders and/or instructions by e-mail, and therefore will not be
> responsible
> for carrying out such orders and/or instructions.  If you, as the intended
> recipient
> of this message, the purpose of which is to inform and update our clients,
> prospects
> and consultants of developments relating to our services and products,
> would not
> like to receive further e-mail correspondence from the sender, please
> "reply" to the
> sender indicating your wishes.  In the U.S.: 1345 Avenue of the Americas,
> New York,
> NY 10105.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>