[c-nsp] Multiprotocol BGP with Cisco

[Per Carlson]

Hi.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 22:14, Grzegorz Janoszka <Grzegorz at janoszka.pl> wrote:
> On 16-4-2010 20:47, Steve Bertrand w rote:
>>
>> You just have to activate the neighbor in both address-family, and have
>> the appropriate prefix lists and other policy config applied in both.
>
> For a common IOS I could imagine doing it in the way you described. The only
> problem is I am trying to achieve it with IOS XR (Cisco CRS-1). The syntax
> here is a little bit different - you activate address-family within the
> neighbor configuration and there is no way to activate v6 family on v4 peer
> and v4 family on v6 peer.

It sure does, here's a v4+v6 over v4 example.

router bgp 1
 neighbor-group v4v6
  remote-as 1
  update-source Loopback0
  address-family ipv4 unicast
  !
  address-family ipv6 unicast
  !
 !
 neighbor 172.16.1.2
  use neighbor-group v4v6
 !
end


RP/0/7/CPU0:xr12k#sh bgp neighbor 172.16.1.2
BGP neighbor is 172.16.1.2
 Remote AS 1, local AS 1, internal link
 Remote router ID 172.16.1.2
  BGP state = Established, up for 00:07:32
  Neighbor capabilities:
    Route refresh: advertised and received
    Graceful Restart (GR Awareness): received
    4-byte AS: advertised and received
    Address family IPv4 Unicast: advertised and received
    Address family IPv6 Unicast: advertised and received

 For Address Family: IPv4 Unicast
  9 accepted prefixes, 7 are bestpaths
  Prefix advertised 30, suppressed 0, withdrawn 0, maximum limit 524288

 For Address Family: IPv6 Unicast
  3 accepted prefixes, 0 are bestpaths
  Prefix advertised 4, suppressed 0, withdrawn 0, maximum limit 131072


RP/0/7/CPU0:xr12k#sh bgp ipv6 unicast summary
Neighbor        Spk    AS MsgRcvd MsgSent   TblVer  InQ OutQ Up/Down  St/PfxRcd
172.16.1.2        0     1  109279  118921      103    0    0 00:06:42        3


RP/0/7/CPU0:xr12k#sh bgp ipv6 unicast neighbors 172.16.1.2 routes
   Network            Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
* i2001:xxxx:1017::/116
                      2001:xxxx:1101::2
                               0    100      0 ?
* i2001:xxxx:1101::2/128
                      2001:xxxx:1101::2
                               0    100      0 ?
* i2001:xxxx:200::/40 2001:xxxx:1101::2
                               0    100      0 i


-- 
Pelle

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?