[c-nsp] vpnv4 nlri in bgp but not marked as > best in order to get into rib

[adam vitkovsky]

Where the prefixes marked with rib failure? Or simply none of them when
marked as best?
Are you using route-maps or just simple import definitions?

It's scary that BGP could malfunction like this

Well if you saw the routes in BGP than they must have passed through the
import filters, wondering why BGP would not mark them as best, maybe some
failure during decision process   
When you removed the import from VRF the BGP must have dropped the prefixes
according to the default RT filters and relearned them once you added the
import back


adam

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Aaron
Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 3:38 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] vpnv4 nlri in bgp but not marked as > best in order to get
into rib

Have y'all ever seen this ?

 

I was learning vpnv4 prefixes from pe far away in my local bgp table, but
strangely none were marked > best.  Sh route vrf one 1.2.3.0 showed routed
to null0 for a /18 that I have as a static in order to advertise larger cidr
to my isp.  So as packets came from internet they were sent to bit bucket
for 1.2.3.0/24 and customer was having no connectivity.

 

I simply removed import from vrf one and readded it and BAM, bgp marked as
best and installed into rib and customer could surf.

 

Aaron

_______________________________________________
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/