[c-nsp] BGP to OSPF redistribution

[null zeroroute]

We only manage the CE devices, not the PE's.  I just reviewed the sham-link
documentation, and my understanding is that the provider needs to configure
sham links between each PE over their backbone.  I don't think they'll
support this.  I'm rather certain that they will only support BGP or
standard redistribution.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Saxon Jones <saxon.jones at gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually I re-read your problem. Sham links may be a solution to look at,
> if you control the right pieces of equipment. You can also mess with the AD
> of OSPF external routes versus OSPF internal routes but this is probably a
> Bad Idea(TM) (and my testing of this a few years ago showed it didn't have
> the desired result).
>
> ______________________________
> Saxon Jones
>
> Email: saxon.jones at gmail.com
> Telephone: (780) 669-0899
> Toll-free: (866) 701-8022
> United Kingdom: 0(1315)168664
>
>
>
> 2010/1/13 Saxon Jones <saxon.jones at gmail.com>
>
> If I understand your question properly, why not just change the
>> administrative distance of the eBGP routes to something less than 110.
>> ______________________________
>> Saxon Jones
>>
>> Email: saxon.jones at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> 2010/1/13 null zeroroute <nullzero.route at gmail.com>
>>
>>> I'm having a problem trying to figure out a way to get eBGP learned
>>> routes
>>> (from a layer-3 VPN MPLS WAN provider) into our internal OSPF, so that
>>> the
>>> routes learned via the provider are preffered over the internally learned
>>> OSPF routes.
>>>
>>> No matter where the BGP-->OSPF redistribution point is, if it's the PE or
>>> CE, the routes will still show up (by default) as OSPF external, and will
>>> never be prefferred.
>>>
>>> The provider who's path we prefer will only run BGP.  We would like to
>>> use
>>> OSPF everywhere if possible, for several reasons.
>>>
>>> WAN provider A is a layer-3 VPN MPLS network, and is the prefferred path.
>>> WAN provider B is a layer-2 VPN MPLS network over which we run OSPF.
>>> Provider B's network is inferior at times and we use it as a backup.
>>>
>>> The equipment where the eBGP peering relationsips exist is a mix of 7600,
>>> 3800, 2800, 1800, 6500, 3750, 3550.
>>>
>>> We considered GRE over the providers network however we then wind up with
>>> 25+ tunnels at each location, and that just grows as each new site is
>>> added,
>>> not to mention some potential issues regarding throughput with a GRE
>>> tunnel
>>> in the path.
>>>
>>> Is there a way to redistribute BGP into OSPF so that the routes can be
>>> anything but OSPF external?
>>>
>>> I have not found a way to do this yet, and was wondering if it's even
>>> possible, or if I'm missing something obvious.  Any suggestions
>>> appreciated.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
>>
>>
>