[j-nsp] aggregates - active/passive option

[C. Hagel]

All,	
	The "passive" option WILL install the aggregate route when there
are no active contributing routes (as will a "generate route").  When
you create a aggregate route without the "passive" switch and there are
no contributing routes, the aggregate route will not be active and will
not be passed on.  
	For next-hop options there actually are 3, #1 is nothing behind
the route (i.e. aggregate route x.x.x.x <cr>) this will give you the
next-hop of the contributing routes.  #2 reject (i.e. aggregate route
x.x.x.x reject) this will send an ICMP message for any packet that is
destine to your aggregate address (i.e. root at router> ping 10.200.1.0   where
10.200.1.0/24 is your aggregate route).  #3 discard (i.e. aggregate route
x.x.x.x discard) this will silently discard any route that is destine to the
aggregae route (i.e. root at router> ping 10.200.1.0    where 10.200.1.0/24
is your aggregate route).



On Thu, 3 Feb 2005 13:30:45 +0100
Bostjan Fele <bostjan.fele at smart-com.si> wrote:

BF> Hi,
BF> 
BF> aggregate routes have only two next-hop options: reject (default) or
BF> discard. First one enables ICMP messages if there is no more specific route,
BF> second one silently discards packet. This has nothing to do with having a
BF> contributing route. I have not checked if passive option installes aggregate
BF> route in first place if there is no contributing route or not. I would try
BF> this with configuring one static route to contribute and then remove it.
BF> 
BF> REgards,
BF> Bostjan Fele
BF> 
BF> -----Original Message-----
BF> From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
BF> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net]On Behalf Of Stefan Fouant
BF> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 4:05 PM
BF> To: Jeroen Valcke
BF> Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
BF> Subject: Re: [j-nsp] aggregates - active/passive option
BF> 
BF> 
BF> I believe the passive option when used with aggregate / generated routes
BF>   will cause the route to be continually installed in the routing and
BF> forwarding tables, even in light of no contributing routes.  However, if
BF> there are no contributing routes, the next-hop will be set to reject.
BF> 
BF> Stefan Fouant
BF> Senior Network Engineer
BF> UUNET / MCI
BF> 
BF> Jeroen Valcke wrote:
BF> > Hello,
BF> >
BF> > Then when I change the active/passive parameter to passive for all these
BF> > aggregate routes, they do get installed in the routing table. I find
BF> > this to be weird since the doc says;
BF> >
BF> > 	passive - Have a route remain continually installed in the
BF> > 	routing and forwarding tables even when it becomes inactive.
BF> >
BF> > Reading this, one would expect that the route should at least have been
BF> > active before. Then how come it installs the aggregate route although
BF> > the route itself has never been active?
BF> >
BF> > Best regards,
BF> > -Jeroen-
BF> _______________________________________________
BF> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
BF> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
BF> 
BF> _______________________________________________
BF> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
BF> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


-- 
 Chris Hagel
JNCIP #103
<nanog at lordkron.net>