?<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7638.1">
<TITLE>Re: [f-nsp] VRRP-E in combination with Route-Maps</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV id=idOWAReplyText62057 dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr><FONT face=Arial color=#000000 size=2>What type of routes are you
getting from your providers? Full? Default route?</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr><BR>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> foundry-nsp-bounces@puck.nether.net on
behalf of A. Krijgsman - QCC<BR><B>Sent:</B> Sun 2/26/2006 4:17 AM<BR><B>To:</B>
foundry-nsp@puck.nether.net<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [f-nsp] VRRP-E in combination
with Route-Maps<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Dear Gunther / All,<BR>
<BR>
That would have been my first guess as well.<BR>
However when I try the bgp route to my provider B. (Below are my real<BR>
results.)<BR>
You will see it takes the longer AS-path trough provider A to the provider<BR>
B. IP :-(<BR>
<BR>
Has this anything to do with the backup-priority / track-priority in VRRP-E?<BR>
Or is this default iBGP behaviour?<BR>
<BR>
If anyone has a clue? :-)<BR>
<BR>
Kind regards,<BR>
Armand<BR>
<BR>
++++++++++++++++++++++++ MY RESULT +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>
SSH@ams-gs-rt2>show ip bgp 217.170.9.139<BR>
Number of BGP Routes matching display condition : 2<BR>
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i internal<BR>
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete<BR>
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path<BR>
*> 217.170.9.0/24 84.233.188.97 100 0 8928 15412<BR>
24785 24785 i<BR>
*i 217.170.9.0/24 217.170.9.129 100 0 24785 i<BR>
Last update to IP routing table: 2d1h4m16s, 1 path(s) installed:<BR>
Gateway Port<BR>
84.233.188.97 v1<BR>
Route is advertised to 1 peers:<BR>
195.144.2.2(35829)<BR>
++++++++++++++++++++++++ MY RESULT +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<BR>
<BR>
----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Gunther Stammwitz" <gstammw@gmx.net><BR>
To: "'A. Krijgsman - QCC'" <a.krijgsman@quality-control-centre.net>;<BR>
<foundry-nsp@puck.nether.net><BR>
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 1:01 PM<BR>
Subject: AW: [f-nsp] VRRP-E in combination with Route-Maps<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Hello Armand,<BR>
><BR>
> I guess you're running BGP as outside/external routing protocol, right?<BR>
> Well... That would explain why traffic is flowing the way it is: if both<BR>
of<BR>
> your providers are supplying you with the same as-path-lengths for most of<BR>
> the prefixes - this is mostly happening when both of them are of the same<BR>
> tier-class like both are tier1 - your router is always going to prefer the<BR>
> the external path over the internal one.<BR>
> Example:<BR>
> Here we can see that the network 3.0.0.0/8 can be reached in 5 as-hops.<BR>
The<BR>
> internal path (5.6.7.8) as well as the external one have exactly the same<BR>
> lenght and localpref but the external one is being preferred. This is a<BR>
> standard mechanism in bgp (ebgp over ibgp).<BR>
><BR>
> *> 3.0.0.0/8 1.2.3.4 999 0 12345 3356 701<BR>
> 703 80 i<BR>
> *i 3.0.0.0/8 5.6.7.8 0 999 0 12345 3356 701<BR>
> 703 80 i<BR>
><BR>
> I hope this was a help.<BR>
> Gunther<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________<BR>
foundry-nsp mailing list<BR>
foundry-nsp@puck.nether.net<BR>
<A HREF="http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp">http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp</A><BR></FONT></P></DIV>
</BODY>
</HTML>