[c-nsp] Leaking global into VRF

[Anrey Teslenko]

Hello.
We have same issue, which you discussed here.
How we can configure route back to the VRF if routes inside it getting
through eBGP?

According this
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk436/tk832/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080231a3e.shtml
we can do that only for static routes.

How do Dynamic Route leaking from VRF to Global?

Thanks for advise


2010/11/9 Harold Ritter <hritter at cisco.com>

> Jason,
>
> Remember that the traffic will be forwarded according to the global routing
> table, so you do not need a label unless you have a BGP free core. Does the
> destination have a route back to the VRF route though?
>
> Regards
>
> Le 2010-11-09 à 08:45, Jason Lixfeld a écrit :
>
> >
> > On 2010-11-09, at 1:18 AM, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:
> >
> >> Jason,
> >>
> >>> I'm trying to lab up a scenario where I can leak routes from the
> >> global
> >>> table into a VRF, but I'm running up against an issue and I'm hoping
> >> someone
> >>> here can point out where I might be misstepping.
> >>>
> >>> My P router is also my peering router.  That is, in addition to it's P
> >>> duties, it also speaks eBGP to another autonomous system.  I want to
> >> take
> >>> the eBGP learned prefixes and import them into a VRF.  This part seems
> >> to
> >>> work, but the issue is that the adjacent PE doesn't seem to see the
> >> prefix
> >>> that has been imported.  The PE sees the global entry, but it doesn't
> >> see
> >>> the prefix in the vpnv4 AF for the VRF in question.
> >>
> >> This looks expected as a PE router (your peering router) importing a
> >> prefix from another VRF (or from global in your case) into a VRF never
> >> exports this prefix from the importing VRF into vpnv4. So in your case,
> >> you need the "import ipv4 unicast map VRF-IMPORT" on all PE routers
> >> needing the prefix.
> >
> > Interesting.  I was of the belief that MPBGP would take care of
> announcing these prefixes once leaked into a VRF AF.  Have I misunderstood
> the extent of MPBGP here, or is there another way to do it that uses (MP)BGP
> in some way?
> >
> > Until then, I've set import ipv4 ... on all the PEs down the line, and
> while the prefix is now seen inside the VRF on all the devices I expect it
> to, my packets still don't seem to be getting to where I want them to go.
>  That is, they seem to be going nowhere.  I think one reason why is because
> no routers inside my network have a label associated with the eBGP prefix
> I'm trying to reach:
> >
> > P1#show ip route vrf INTERNET 7.7.7.7
> >
> > Routing Table: INTERNET
> > Routing entry for 7.7.7.7/32
> >  Known via "bgp 6666", distance 20, metric 0
> >  Tag 1, type external
> >  Last update from 7.0.0.1 00:02:38 ago
> >  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> >  * 7.0.0.1 (default), from 7.0.0.1, 00:02:38 ago
> >      Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
> >      AS Hops 1
> >      Route tag 1
> >      MPLS label: none
> > P1#
> >
> > And if this is potentially the root cause, how to get a label on this
> prefix isn't clear to me.  This is an eBGP prefix from an outside AS.  They
> have no knowledge that their announcements are ultimately going to end up in
> a VRF once they get over to us.  I only mention that incase it turns out to
> be part of the problem.
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
>
>
> Harold Ritter
> Directeur Technique/Technical Leader
> Advanced Services Central Engineering
> CCIE 4168 (R&S, SP)
>
> harold at cisco.com
> Téléphone: 514 847 6856
>
> Les Systèmes Cisco
> 1800 McGill College
> Suite 700
> Montréal, Québec H3A 3J6
> Canada
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>