[c-nsp] IP SLA tracking, static routes and OSPF announcements

[Scott Harvanek]

I’ve encountered an odd routing issue and I’m hoping it’s a simple configuration issue and not a Bug, looking for input on this please :)

Equipment: Cisco 6500E series w/ SUP720 MSFC3/PFC3
Software: 15.1(2)SY10, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc4) ADV IP Services

Scenario;
We have a pair of the above software/hardware combinations, providing HSRP to another device.  A /29 is used as the link network/HSRP and there are subnets then routed to the far side in each 6509E.  We are using IP SLA reachability tracking to activate/deactivate routes;

Tracking configuration;
track 5 ip sla 5 reachability
ip sla 5
 icmp-echo <MY DESTINATION> source-ip <MY SOURCE>
 threshold 2
 timeout 1000
 frequency 3
ip sla schedule 5 life forever start-time now

ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.224 <MY DESTINATION> track 5
ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.248 <MY DESTINATION> track 5

This is all works fine however, the far side router briefly stopped responding or a reachability issue occurred;

Apr 19 21:45:13.771: %TRACKING-5-STATE: 5 ip sla 5 reachability Up->Down
Apr 19 21:45:18.771: %TRACKING-5-STATE: 5 ip sla 5 reachability Down->Up

When this occurred, the routes were no longer being announced even after recover HOWEVER the router (6509E) thought they were;

TUSLDC2.C6509E.1#    sh ip route x.x.x.x
Routing entry for x.x.x.x/27
  Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0
  Redistributing via ospf xxxxx
  Advertised by ospf xxxxx subnets
  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
  * <MY DESTINATION>
      Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1 

However, none of the other OSPF neighbors saw this route announcement, upon removing the static routes and re-applying them the announcement was then visible again… no other changes were made;

no ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.224 <MY DESTINATION> track 5
no ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.248 <MY DESTINATION> track 5
ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.224 <MY DESTINATION> track 5
ip route x.x.x.x 255.255.255.248 <MY DESTINATION> track 5

What am I doing wrong or, is this a bug/known behavior?

-Scott H