[j-nsp] Hidden IPv6 Route inside BGP - but why?

Mon Jul 20 17:21:57 EDT 2009

I assume that the related protocol and indirect forwarding next hops are reachable?

I'd issue a show route resolution unresolved just to be sure.

Is there any chance you have an import policy filtering that route?  IIRC, import route filters result in a hidden routes.

[edit]
regress at vpn04# run show route 2.2.2.2 table inet.0 hidden 

inet.0: 36 destinations, 37 routes (34 active, 0 holddown, 2 hidden)
+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both

2.2.2.2/32          [BGP ] 00:00:07, localpref 100, from 10.255.14.181
                      AS path: I
                    > via so-1/0/0.0, label-switched-path to_r1

[edit]
regress at vpn04# show policy-options policy-statement test 
from {
    route-filter 2.2.2.2/32 exact;
}
then reject;

regress at vpn04# show protocols bgp 
traceoptions {
    file bgp_r4 size 10m;
    flag all detail;
}
group int {
    type internal;
    local-address 10.255.14.174;
    import test;
    family inet {
        unicast;
    }
    family inet-vpn {
        unicast;
        multicast;
    }
    neighbor 10.255.14.181;
    neighbor 10.255.14.175;
}

-----Original Message-----
From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Hendrik Kahmann
Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:52 PM
To: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Hidden IPv6 Route inside BGP - but why?

Hello,

thanks for your comment!

We are not using a RR at the edge of this scenario but the problem is located on another location.

1. The routes are received from a RR and advertised to one of our core systems.

2. From here the routes are propageted to our iBGP which is IPv6 enabled. All received routes are usable at this location (at the RR).  
Our other systems, which are getting the prefixes via iBGP aren't able to install the routes into the table inet6.0 - but there is no hint like "unusable next-hop".

Excerpt from the machine connected to the RR:

me at machine1> show route table inet6.0 2001:7b0::/32

inet6.0: 422 destinations, 424 routes (180 active, 0 holddown, 242
hidden)
+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both

2001:7b0::/32      *[BGP/170] 3d 09:34:37, MED 101, localpref 100,  
from 2001:7f8::1a27:5051:c09d
                       AS path: 8881 I
                     > to 2001:7f8::22b1:192:80 via ge-7/1/0.0

Excerpt from the machine meshed in the iBGP:

me at machine2> show route table inet6.0 2001:7b0::/32 hidden

inet6.0: 184 destinations, 189 routes (37 active, 0 holddown, 147
hidden)
+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both

2001:7b0::/32       [BGP ] 11:39:05, MED 101, localpref 100, from  
2001:4110::fc1
                       AS path: 8881 I
                     > to fe80::214:f6ff:fea4:9df2 via xe-1/2/0.0

Does this help us to get a step forward with this problem?

Thanks in advance,

Hendrik

Am 20.07.2009 um 16:34 schrieb Andy Wu:

> are you using RR ? make sure your RR has routes for PE's loopback 
> address  in inet.3 table, or inet6.3 table , ( by placing RR in LSP 
> path , or create a static 0/0 route and put into inet.3 / inet6.3 
> table ) , otherwise RR won't reflect the routes and all IPv6 routes 
> are shown as hidden
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:05 AM, Hendrik Kahmann 
> <hendrik.kahmann at ewetel.de
> > wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> we have a problem with a IPv6 route in the lab, which is hidden for 
> us. What could be the reason for that? In the most documents we can 
> only find information around "next-hop unusable" but this does not 
> seem to be the reason for us.
>
> Following excerpt has been grabbed from one of our machines:
>
>
> ME at OurMachine> show route table inet6.0 2001:4178::/32 hidden 
> extensive
>
> inet6.0: 184 destinations, 189 routes (37 active, 0 holddown, 147
> hidden)
> 2001:4178::/32 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>         BGP                 /-101
>                Next hop type: Indirect
>                Next-hop reference count: 147
>                Source: xxxx:xxxx::xxx
>                Next hop type: Router, Next hop index: 1355
>                Next hop: xxxx::xxx:xxxx:xxxx:xxxx via xe-1/2/0.0, 
> selected
>                Protocol next hop: xxx:xxxx::fc1
>                Indirect next hop: fa12958 1048605
>                State: <Hidden Int Ext>
>                Local AS:  OurAS Peer AS:  OurAS
>                Age: 4:50:19    Metric2: 10
>                Task: BGP_OurAS.xxx:xxxx::fc1+179
>                AS path: 8767 15456 I
>                Localpref: 100
>                Router ID: x.x.x.x
>                Indirect next hops: 1
>                        Protocol next hop: xxxx:xxxx::fc1 Metric: 10
>                        Indirect next hop: fa12958 1048605
>                        Indirect path forwarding next hops: 1
>                                Next hop type: Router
>                                Next hop: xxxx::xxx:xxx:xxxx:xxxx via 
> xe-1/2/0.0
>                        xxx:xxxx::xxx/128 Originating RIB: inet6.0
>                          Metric: 10                      Node path  
> count: 1
>                          Forwarding nexthops: 1
>                                Nexthop: xxxx::xxx:xxx:xxxx:xxxx via 
> xe-1/2/0.0
>
>
> Is there something pointing to a reason or a solution for this?
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Hendrik
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net 
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp