[j-nsp] L2VPN Active Route Selection
Eric Van Tol
eric at atlantech.net
Mon Jun 27 10:35:58 EDT 2011
Hi all,
I've got a question about the route selection for L2VPN routes (Kompella). I'm trying to figure out why my PEs are not choosing the direct IBGP peering between themselves for active route selection. Here's the basic topology:
/--P1--P3--P5--P7--\
PE1 -- | | | | -- PE2
\--P2--P4--P6--P8--/
PE1 is RR client of P1/P2.
PE2 is RR client of P7/P8.
P1/P2 are RR clients of P3/P4.
P7/P8 are RR clients of P5/P6.
P3/P4/P5/P6 are all full-mesh IBGP peers.
I'm using IS-IS for my IGP and RSVP as the label distribution protocol.
The LSP is setup between PE1 and PE2 and IBGP is established. According to http://tinyurl.com/625ve7w, it appears to me that #9 should be the tie-breaker here. All other criteria are the same. However, both PE1 and PE2 are showing the best path as the prefix announced through their respective RRs with "Not Best in its group - No difference". Below is the output of a 'show route extensive' the VPN's routing table. Can someone take a look and school me on what it is I'm missing?
Thanks,
evt
~~~~
admin at lab.router# run show route table cid-512.l2vpn.0 detail
cid-512.l2vpn.0: 3 destinations, 5 routes (3 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
10.18.20.10:2:1:1/96 (3 entries, 1 announced)
*BGP Preference: 170/-101
Route Distinguisher: 10.18.20.10:2
Next hop type: Indirect
Next-hop reference count: 11
Source: 10.18.20.72
Protocol next hop: 10.18.20.10
Indirect next hop: 2 no-forward
State: <Secondary Active Int Ext>
Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65000
Age: 6d 2:03:37 Metric2: 1
Task: BGP_65000.10.18.20.72+49179
Announcement bits (1): 0-cid-512-l2vpn
AS path: I (Originator) Cluster list: 10.18.20.72 10.18.20.70 10.18.20.65 10.18.20.67
AS path: Originator ID: 10.18.20.10
Communities: target:65000:2 Layer2-info: encaps:VLAN, control flags:Control-Word, mtu: 0, site preference: 100
Import Accepted
Label-base: 800000, range: 4, status-vector: 0x0
Localpref: 100
Router ID: 10.18.20.72
Primary Routing Table bgp.l2vpn.0
BGP Preference: 170/-101
Route Distinguisher: 10.18.20.10:2
Next hop type: Indirect
Next-hop reference count: 11
Source: 10.18.20.73
Protocol next hop: 10.18.20.10
Indirect next hop: 2 no-forward
State: <Secondary NotBest Int Ext>
Inactive reason: Not Best in its group - No difference
Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65000
Age: 6d 2:03:37 Metric2: 1
Task: BGP_65000.10.18.20.73+52338
AS path: I (Originator) Cluster list: 10.18.20.73 10.18.20.70 10.18.20.65 10.18.20.67
AS path: Originator ID: 10.18.20.10
Communities: target:65000:2 Layer2-info: encaps:VLAN, control flags:Control-Word, mtu: 0, site preference: 100
Import Accepted
Label-base: 800000, range: 4, status-vector: 0x0
Localpref: 100
Router ID: 10.18.20.73
Primary Routing Table bgp.l2vpn.0
BGP Preference: 170/-101
Route Distinguisher: 10.18.20.10:2
Next hop type: Indirect
Next-hop reference count: 11
Source: 10.18.20.10
Protocol next hop: 10.18.20.10
Indirect next hop: 2 no-forward
State: <Secondary NotBest Int Ext>
Inactive reason: Not Best in its group - No difference
Local AS: 65000 Peer AS: 65000
Age: 6d 2:03:37 Metric2: 1
Task: BGP_65000.10.18.20.10+59106
AS path: I
Communities: target:65000:2 Layer2-info: encaps:VLAN, control flags:Control-Word, mtu: 0, site preference: 100
Import Accepted
Label-base: 800000, range: 4, status-vector: 0x0
Localpref: 100
Router ID: 10.18.20.10
Primary Routing Table bgp.l2vpn.0
More information about the juniper-nsp
mailing list