[j-nsp] JNCIP EBGP Case Study...
Nam, Nguyen Hoang
nhnam at j-protek.net
Fri Oct 30 05:23:33 EDT 2009
Hi Hoogen !
I see that there is a requirement as prepend them with as number 64512 twice not 65412 twice
Because if prepend 65412 as we also have to enable as loop 3
________________________________________
From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of juniper-nsp-request at puck.nether.net [juniper-nsp-request at puck.nether.net]
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 2:42 PM
To: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 83, Issue 54
Send juniper-nsp mailing list submissions to
juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
juniper-nsp-request at puck.nether.net
You can reach the person managing the list at
juniper-nsp-owner at puck.nether.net
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of juniper-nsp digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: death by branding (Adam Rothschild)
2. Re: JNCIP EBGP Case Study... (Hoogen)
3. Re: JNCIP EBGP Case Study... (Hoogen)
4. Re: death by branding (Ben Dale)
5. Re: JNCIP EBGP Case Study... (Felix Schueren)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:21:00 -0400
From: Adam Rothschild <asr at latency.net>
To: Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>
Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] death by branding
Message-ID: <20091029202100.GA49770 at latency.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On 2009-10-29-14:58:32, Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net> wrote:
> http://www.e-gerbil.net/juniper_style_guide.pdf
This appears to return a forbidden.
-a
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:56:29 -0700
From: Hoogen <hoogen82 at gmail.com>
To: Sean Clarke <sean at clarke-3.demon.nl>
Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP EBGP Case Study...
Message-ID:
<dffd2e730910291456m5bc70efap149362e8fd46c0b2 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Okay.. Earlier task required while accepting routes from peer to tag them
with a community and prepend them with as number 65412 twice... I notice
that when I deactivate that.. It works.. So obviously R3 is considering the
routes received from R1 with prepend of 65412 for all P1 routes to be some
sort of as loop... So I guess there is something wrong about it..
Page 568 of the JNCIP books...
-Hoogen
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Hoogen <hoogen82 at gmail.com> wrote:
> R1
>
> lab at R1> show configuration routing-options
> static {
> route 10.0.200.0/24 {
> next-hop 10.0.1.102;
> no-readvertise;
> }
> route 192.168.10.0/24 reject;
> route 192.168.100.0/24 reject;
> route 10.0.0.0/8 {
> next-hop 10.0.4.13;
> qualified-next-hop 10.0.4.6 {
> preference 10;
> }
> }
> }
> martians {
> 192.0.2.0/24 orlonger;
> }
> autonomous-system 65000;
> confederation 65412 members [ 65000 65001 65002 ];
>
> lab at R1>
>
> lab at R1> show configuration protocols bgp
> group 65000 {
> type internal;
> local-address 10.0.6.1;
> export ibgp;
> neighbor 10.0.3.3;
> }
> group p1 {
> type external;
> import peer-filter-in;
> export p1-export;
> neighbor 10.0.5.254 {
> peer-as 1492;
> }
> }
>
> lab at R1>
>
> lab at R1> show configuration policy-options policy-statement ibgp
> term 1 {
> from {
> protocol static;
> route-filter 192.168.10.0/24 exact;
> }
> then accept;
> }
> term 2 {
> from {
> protocol static;
> route-filter 192.168.100.0/24 exact;
> }
> then {
> metric 101;
> local-preference 101;
> community add no-export;
> accept;
> }
> }
>
> lab at R1>
>
> R3 Configuration
>
> lab at R3> show configuration routing-options
> static {
> route 10.0.200.0/24 {
> next-hop 10.0.1.102;
> no-readvertise;
> }
> route 192.168.30.0/24 reject;
> }
> martians {
> 192.0.2.0/24 orlonger;
> }
> aggregate {
> route 10.0.4.0/22;
> }
> autonomous-system 65000;
> confederation 65412 members [ 65000 65001 65002 ];
>
> lab at R3>
>
> lab at R3> show configuration protocols bgp
> advertise-inactive;
> group 65000 {
> type internal;
> local-address 10.0.3.3;
> export ibgp;
> neighbor 10.0.6.1;
> }
> group c-bgp {
> type external;
> multihop;
> local-address 10.0.3.3;
> export ibgp;
> neighbor 10.0.3.4 {
> hold-time 180;
> peer-as 65001;
> }
> neighbor 10.0.3.5 {
> peer-as 65002;
> }
> }
> group t1-t2 {
> type external;
> damping;
> import [ damp trans-filter-in ];
> export [ no-192-24s prepend ];
> remove-private;
> multipath;
> neighbor 172.16.0.14 {
> peer-as 65222;
> }
> neighbor 172.16.0.18 {
> peer-as 65222;
> }
> }
>
> lab at R3>
>
>
> lab at R3> show configuration policy-options policy-statement ibgp
> term 1 {
> from {
> protocol static;
> route-filter 192.168.30.0/24 exact;
> }
> then accept;
> }
> term 2 {
> from community trans-1-2;
> then {
> next-hop self;
> }
> }
>
> lab at R3>
>
> Thanks for your help guys..
>
> -Hoogen
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 3:36 AM, Sean Clarke <sean at clarke-3.demon.nl>wrote:
>
>>
>> What is in your ibgp export policy from R1 to R3 ? Are you putting
>> something in there to cause an issue ?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/29/09 10:43 AM, Hoogen wrote:
>>
>> Hi Felix,
>>
>> Thank you for the reply..
>>
>> I am not sure how that 17 hidden routes came into play... But its not
>> there now.. I still see the issue..
>>
>> I had already checked the hidden routes..and those are not the ones
>> which are hiding
>>
>> lab at R3# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1 hidden extensive
>>
>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 85 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 3 hidden)
>>
>> __juniper_private1__.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0
>> holddown, 0 hidden)
>>
>> iso.0: 1 destinations, 1 routes (1 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>
>> [edit]
>> lab at R3#
>>
>> lab at R3# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1
>>
>>
>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 85 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 3 hidden)
>> Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS path
>> * 192.168.10.0/24 10.0.6.1 100 I
>> * 192.168.100.0/24 10.0.6.1 101 101 I
>>
>> __juniper_private1__.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0
>> holddown, 0 hidden)
>>
>> iso.0: 1 destinations, 1 routes (1 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>
>> [edit]
>> lab at R3#
>>
>> lab at R3# run show route protocol bgp hidden extensive
>>
>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 85 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 3 hidden)
>> 172.17.0.0/16 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>> BGP /-101
>> Next-hop reference count: 2
>> Source: 172.16.0.14
>> Next hop: 172.16.0.14 via ge-0/0/0.0, selected
>> State: <Hidden Ext>
>> Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65222
>> Age: 1:27:54
>> Task: BGP_65222.172.16.0.14+3227
>> AS path: 65222 I
>> Localpref: 100
>> Router ID: 130.130.0.1
>>
>> 192.0.2.0/24 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>> BGP /-101
>> Next-hop reference count: 5
>> Source: 172.16.0.18
>> Next hop: 172.16.0.18 via ge-0/0/3.0, selected
>> State: <Hidden Martian Ext>
>> Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65222
>> Age: 1:28:19
>> Task: BGP_65222.172.16.0.18+179
>> AS path: 65222 I
>> Communities: 65412:102
>> Localpref: 100
>> Router ID: 130.130.0.2
>>
>> 220.0.0.0/28 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>> BGP /-101
>> Next-hop reference count: 5
>> Source: 172.16.0.18
>> Next hop: 172.16.0.18 via ge-0/0/3.0, selected
>> State: <Hidden Ext>
>> Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65222
>> Age: 1:28:19
>> Task: BGP_65222.172.16.0.18+179
>> AS path: 65222 I
>> Localpref: 100
>> Router ID: 130.130.0.2
>>
>> __juniper_private1__.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0
>> holddown, 0 hidden)
>>
>> iso.0: 1 destinations, 1 routes (1 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>
>> [edit]
>> lab at R3#
>>
>>
>> The one I am concerned is with group 65000 and I don't have any import
>> policy to deny anything there..
>>
>> [edit]
>> lab at R3# show protocols bgp
>> advertise-inactive;
>> group 65000 {
>> type internal;
>> local-address 10.0.3.3;
>> export ibgp;
>> neighbor 10.0.6.1;
>> }
>> group c-bgp {
>> type external;
>> multihop;
>> local-address 10.0.3.3;
>> export ibgp;
>> neighbor 10.0.3.4 {
>> hold-time 180;
>> peer-as 65001;
>> }
>> neighbor 10.0.3.5 {
>> peer-as 65002;
>> }
>> }
>> group t1-t2 {
>> type external;
>> damping;
>> import [ damp trans-filter-in ];
>> export [ no-192-24s prepend ];
>> remove-private;
>> multipath;
>> neighbor 172.16.0.14 {
>> peer-as 65222;
>> }
>> neighbor 172.16.0.18 {
>> peer-as 65222;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> [edit]
>> lab at R3#
>>
>> This is really strange.. I compared the solutions, and there seems
>> nothing wrong..
>>
>> -Hoogen
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:59 AM, Felix Schueren <
>> felix.schueren at hosteurope.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Hoogen,
>>>
>>> Hoogen wrote:
>>> >>> Now R3 only receives
>>> >>>
>>> >>> lab at R3# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1
>>> >>>
>>> >>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 106 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 17
>>> hidden)
>>> >>> Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS
>>> path
>>> >>> * 192.168.10.0/24 10.0.6.1 100 I
>>> >>> * 192.168.100.0/24 10.0.6.1 101 101 I
>>> >>>
>>> please do
>>> show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1 hidden extensive
>>>
>>> also paste
>>> show configuration protocols bgp
>>>
>>> both from R3
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Felix
>>>
>>> --
>>> Felix Sch?ren
>>> Head of Network
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Host Europe GmbH - http://www.hosteurope.de
>>> Welserstra?e 14 - 51149 K?ln - Germany
>>> Telefon: 0800 467 8387 - Fax: +49 180 5 66 3233 (*)
>>> HRB 28495 Amtsgericht K?ln - USt-IdNr.: DE187370678
>>> Gesch?ftsf?hrer:
>>> Uwe Braun - Alex Collins - Mark Joseph - Patrick Pulverm?ller
>>>
>>> (*) 0,14 EUR/Min. aus dem dt. Festnetz, Mobilfunkpreise ggf. abweichend
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:29:19 -0700
From: Hoogen <hoogen82 at gmail.com>
To: Sean Clarke <sean at clarke-3.demon.nl>
Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP EBGP Case Study...
Message-ID:
<dffd2e730910291529q39e546ftd96ba2b40127acdc at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I guess for the solution to work we need to have
autonomous-system 65001 loops 3;
This would make sure we get those routes.
-Hoogen
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Hoogen <hoogen82 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay.. Earlier task required while accepting routes from peer to tag them
> with a community and prepend them with as number 65412 twice... I notice
> that when I deactivate that.. It works.. So obviously R3 is considering the
> routes received from R1 with prepend of 65412 for all P1 routes to be some
> sort of as loop... So I guess there is something wrong about it..
>
> Page 568 of the JNCIP books...
>
> -Hoogen
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Hoogen <hoogen82 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> R1
>>
>> lab at R1> show configuration routing-options
>> static {
>> route 10.0.200.0/24 {
>> next-hop 10.0.1.102;
>> no-readvertise;
>> }
>> route 192.168.10.0/24 reject;
>> route 192.168.100.0/24 reject;
>> route 10.0.0.0/8 {
>> next-hop 10.0.4.13;
>> qualified-next-hop 10.0.4.6 {
>> preference 10;
>> }
>> }
>> }
>> martians {
>> 192.0.2.0/24 orlonger;
>> }
>> autonomous-system 65000;
>> confederation 65412 members [ 65000 65001 65002 ];
>>
>> lab at R1>
>>
>> lab at R1> show configuration protocols bgp
>> group 65000 {
>> type internal;
>> local-address 10.0.6.1;
>> export ibgp;
>> neighbor 10.0.3.3;
>> }
>> group p1 {
>> type external;
>> import peer-filter-in;
>> export p1-export;
>> neighbor 10.0.5.254 {
>> peer-as 1492;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> lab at R1>
>>
>> lab at R1> show configuration policy-options policy-statement ibgp
>> term 1 {
>> from {
>> protocol static;
>> route-filter 192.168.10.0/24 exact;
>> }
>> then accept;
>> }
>> term 2 {
>> from {
>> protocol static;
>> route-filter 192.168.100.0/24 exact;
>> }
>> then {
>> metric 101;
>> local-preference 101;
>> community add no-export;
>> accept;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> lab at R1>
>>
>> R3 Configuration
>>
>> lab at R3> show configuration routing-options
>> static {
>> route 10.0.200.0/24 {
>> next-hop 10.0.1.102;
>> no-readvertise;
>> }
>> route 192.168.30.0/24 reject;
>> }
>> martians {
>> 192.0.2.0/24 orlonger;
>> }
>> aggregate {
>> route 10.0.4.0/22;
>> }
>> autonomous-system 65000;
>> confederation 65412 members [ 65000 65001 65002 ];
>>
>> lab at R3>
>>
>> lab at R3> show configuration protocols bgp
>> advertise-inactive;
>> group 65000 {
>> type internal;
>> local-address 10.0.3.3;
>> export ibgp;
>> neighbor 10.0.6.1;
>> }
>> group c-bgp {
>> type external;
>> multihop;
>> local-address 10.0.3.3;
>> export ibgp;
>> neighbor 10.0.3.4 {
>> hold-time 180;
>> peer-as 65001;
>> }
>> neighbor 10.0.3.5 {
>> peer-as 65002;
>> }
>> }
>> group t1-t2 {
>> type external;
>> damping;
>> import [ damp trans-filter-in ];
>> export [ no-192-24s prepend ];
>> remove-private;
>> multipath;
>> neighbor 172.16.0.14 {
>> peer-as 65222;
>> }
>> neighbor 172.16.0.18 {
>> peer-as 65222;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> lab at R3>
>>
>>
>> lab at R3> show configuration policy-options policy-statement ibgp
>> term 1 {
>> from {
>> protocol static;
>> route-filter 192.168.30.0/24 exact;
>> }
>> then accept;
>> }
>> term 2 {
>> from community trans-1-2;
>> then {
>> next-hop self;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> lab at R3>
>>
>> Thanks for your help guys..
>>
>> -Hoogen
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 3:36 AM, Sean Clarke <sean at clarke-3.demon.nl>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> What is in your ibgp export policy from R1 to R3 ? Are you putting
>>> something in there to cause an issue ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/29/09 10:43 AM, Hoogen wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Felix,
>>>
>>> Thank you for the reply..
>>>
>>> I am not sure how that 17 hidden routes came into play... But its not
>>> there now.. I still see the issue..
>>>
>>> I had already checked the hidden routes..and those are not the ones
>>> which are hiding
>>>
>>> lab at R3# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1 hidden extensive
>>>
>>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 85 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 3 hidden)
>>>
>>> __juniper_private1__.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0
>>> holddown, 0 hidden)
>>>
>>> iso.0: 1 destinations, 1 routes (1 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>>
>>> [edit]
>>> lab at R3#
>>>
>>> lab at R3# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1
>>>
>>>
>>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 85 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 3 hidden)
>>> Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS path
>>> * 192.168.10.0/24 10.0.6.1 100 I
>>> * 192.168.100.0/24 10.0.6.1 101 101 I
>>>
>>> __juniper_private1__.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0
>>> holddown, 0 hidden)
>>>
>>> iso.0: 1 destinations, 1 routes (1 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>>
>>> [edit]
>>> lab at R3#
>>>
>>> lab at R3# run show route protocol bgp hidden extensive
>>>
>>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 85 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 3 hidden)
>>> 172.17.0.0/16 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>>> BGP /-101
>>> Next-hop reference count: 2
>>> Source: 172.16.0.14
>>> Next hop: 172.16.0.14 via ge-0/0/0.0, selected
>>> State: <Hidden Ext>
>>> Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65222
>>> Age: 1:27:54
>>> Task: BGP_65222.172.16.0.14+3227
>>> AS path: 65222 I
>>> Localpref: 100
>>> Router ID: 130.130.0.1
>>>
>>> 192.0.2.0/24 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>>> BGP /-101
>>> Next-hop reference count: 5
>>> Source: 172.16.0.18
>>> Next hop: 172.16.0.18 via ge-0/0/3.0, selected
>>> State: <Hidden Martian Ext>
>>> Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65222
>>> Age: 1:28:19
>>> Task: BGP_65222.172.16.0.18+179
>>> AS path: 65222 I
>>> Communities: 65412:102
>>> Localpref: 100
>>> Router ID: 130.130.0.2
>>>
>>> 220.0.0.0/28 (1 entry, 0 announced)
>>> BGP /-101
>>> Next-hop reference count: 5
>>> Source: 172.16.0.18
>>> Next hop: 172.16.0.18 via ge-0/0/3.0, selected
>>> State: <Hidden Ext>
>>> Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65222
>>> Age: 1:28:19
>>> Task: BGP_65222.172.16.0.18+179
>>> AS path: 65222 I
>>> Localpref: 100
>>> Router ID: 130.130.0.2
>>>
>>> __juniper_private1__.inet.0: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0
>>> holddown, 0 hidden)
>>>
>>> iso.0: 1 destinations, 1 routes (1 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>>>
>>> [edit]
>>> lab at R3#
>>>
>>>
>>> The one I am concerned is with group 65000 and I don't have any import
>>> policy to deny anything there..
>>>
>>> [edit]
>>> lab at R3# show protocols bgp
>>> advertise-inactive;
>>> group 65000 {
>>> type internal;
>>> local-address 10.0.3.3;
>>> export ibgp;
>>> neighbor 10.0.6.1;
>>> }
>>> group c-bgp {
>>> type external;
>>> multihop;
>>> local-address 10.0.3.3;
>>> export ibgp;
>>> neighbor 10.0.3.4 {
>>> hold-time 180;
>>> peer-as 65001;
>>> }
>>> neighbor 10.0.3.5 {
>>> peer-as 65002;
>>> }
>>> }
>>> group t1-t2 {
>>> type external;
>>> damping;
>>> import [ damp trans-filter-in ];
>>> export [ no-192-24s prepend ];
>>> remove-private;
>>> multipath;
>>> neighbor 172.16.0.14 {
>>> peer-as 65222;
>>> }
>>> neighbor 172.16.0.18 {
>>> peer-as 65222;
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> [edit]
>>> lab at R3#
>>>
>>> This is really strange.. I compared the solutions, and there seems
>>> nothing wrong..
>>>
>>> -Hoogen
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 1:59 AM, Felix Schueren <
>>> felix.schueren at hosteurope.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hoogen,
>>>>
>>>> Hoogen wrote:
>>>> >>> Now R3 only receives
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> lab at R3# run show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> inet.0: 66 destinations, 106 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 17
>>>> hidden)
>>>> >>> Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS
>>>> path
>>>> >>> * 192.168.10.0/24 10.0.6.1 100 I
>>>> >>> * 192.168.100.0/24 10.0.6.1 101 101 I
>>>> >>>
>>>> please do
>>>> show route receive-protocol bgp 10.0.6.1 hidden extensive
>>>>
>>>> also paste
>>>> show configuration protocols bgp
>>>>
>>>> both from R3
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Felix
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Felix Sch?ren
>>>> Head of Network
>>>>
>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Host Europe GmbH - http://www.hosteurope.de
>>>> Welserstra?e 14 - 51149 K?ln - Germany
>>>> Telefon: 0800 467 8387 - Fax: +49 180 5 66 3233 (*)
>>>> HRB 28495 Amtsgericht K?ln - USt-IdNr.: DE187370678
>>>> Gesch?ftsf?hrer:
>>>> Uwe Braun - Alex Collins - Mark Joseph - Patrick Pulverm?ller
>>>>
>>>> (*) 0,14 EUR/Min. aus dem dt. Festnetz, Mobilfunkpreise ggf. abweichend
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:08:18 +1000
From: Ben Dale <bdale at comlinx.com.au>
To: juniper-nsp nsp <juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] death by branding
Message-ID: <D0F4982D-189A-419E-B2F4-96B00FD726C8 at comlinx.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes
That's nothing
http://www.juniper.com.au/
Note this company was formed in 1992 and has had it's current logo for
some time
On 30/10/2009, at 6:38 AM, <Keegan.Holley at sungard.com> <Keegan.Holley at sungard.com
> wrote:
Makes you wonder if the firm charged Juniper more than Carls Jr. or vice
versa...
From:
David Ball <davidtball at gmail.com>
To:
Jonas Frey <jf at probe-networks.de>
Cc:
juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net, Richard A Steenbergen <ras at e-gerbil.net>
Date:
10/29/2009 04:06 PM
Subject:
Re: [j-nsp] death by branding
Sent by:
<juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net>
Well, at least it helps shed light on the premium you pay for the
gear. Those graphic designers and marketing folks aren't free, ya
know!
David
2009/10/29 Jonas Frey <jf at probe-networks.de>:
> ohh my god....
>
> On Thu, 2009-10-29 at 19:58, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
>> http://www.e-gerbil.net/juniper_style_guide.pdf
>> http://www.e-gerbil.net/cjr.png
>>
>> With apologies to Carl's Jr. :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 08:41:35 +0100
From: Felix Schueren <felix.schueren at hosteurope.de>
To: Hoogen <hoogen82 at gmail.com>
Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] JNCIP EBGP Case Study...
Message-ID: <4AEA98AF.7000601 at hosteurope.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Hoogen,
>> Okay.. Earlier task required while accepting routes from peer to tag
>> them with a community and prepend them with as number 65412 twice...
>> I notice that when I deactivate that.. It works.. So obviously R3 is
>> considering the routes received from R1 with prepend of 65412 for
>> all P1 routes to be some sort of as loop... So I guess there is
>> something wrong about it..
>>
>> Page 568 of the JNCIP books...
>>
> I guess for the solution to work we need to have
>
> autonomous-system 65001 loops 3;
>
> This would make sure we get those routes.
>
it would, but I don't remember having to set as-loops when I worked
through the JNCIP book. And I double-checked your initial email to find
you might have a typo:
lab at R1# run show route advertising-protocol bgp 10.0.3.3
>>
>> inet.0: 65 destinations, 69 routes (63 active, 0 holddown, 4 hidden)
>> Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS
path
>> * 3.4.0.0/20 10.0.5.254 100 65412
>> 65412 1492 I
You prepend 65412 65412, where it should be 64512 64512
There's also a typo in at least r1 & r3 configs:
confederation 65412 members [ 65000 65001 65002 ];
your problems may be coming from those typos - if you consistently
mistyped 64512 through your whole setup, it's probably ok, but I'd
double-check all routers.
Note that stuff like this will mess you up badly in the actual lab -
double-check every number you type, it saves time in the long run :)
Kind regards,
Felix
--
Felix Sch?ren
Head of Network
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Host Europe GmbH - http://www.hosteurope.de
Welserstra?e 14 - 51149 K?ln - Germany
Telefon: 0800 467 8387 - Fax: +49 180 5 66 3233 (*)
HRB 28495 Amtsgericht K?ln - USt-IdNr.: DE187370678
Gesch?ftsf?hrer:
Uwe Braun - Alex Collins - Mark Joseph - Patrick Pulverm?ller
(*) 0,14 EUR/Min. aus dem dt. Festnetz, Mobilfunkpreise ggf. abweichend
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list
juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
End of juniper-nsp Digest, Vol 83, Issue 54
*******************************************
More information about the juniper-nsp
mailing list