Hi, all, I’m in search of a little help with the setup of our new core routers. I’ve been running AS16188 and an internal v4 network for quite some years, so most tasks introducing v6 should be a piece of cake - or so I thought ;-)
I’ve run a setup like this since I do not remember when: > router ospf 1 > redistribute connected subnets route-map ospf-redist > > route-map ospf-redist permit 10 > match ip address 10 > > access-list 10 remark OSPF redistribution > access-list 10 permit 217.29.32.0 0.0.15.255 > access-list 10 deny any Just to make sure i would not accidentally inject anything not belonging to my AS into my IGP. On the new systems this looks like this: > router isis IGP > redistribute connected route-map redistribute > > route-map redistribute permit 10 > match ip address redistribute > set metric 10 > route-map redistribute deny 20 > > ip access-list standard redistribute > permit 217.29.32.0 0.0.15.255 > deny any I do not intend to discuss the respective merits of OSPF vs. IS-IS right now. ;-) My idea was since I would need to introduce a new routing protocol, anyway, why not switch to IS-IS and run single-topology? The v4 config cited above does indeed work as it should. Now, let’s add v6: > router isis IGP > address-family ipv6 > redistribute connected route-map redistribute6 > exit-address-family > > route-map redistribute6 permit 10 > match ipv6 address redistribute6 > set metric 10 > route-map redistribute6 deny 20 > > ipv6 access-list redistribute6 > permit ipv6 2A00:B580::/32 any > deny ipv6 any any Redistribution per se is working fine. It’s the limitation to my own prefix (which I want) that does not work. If I introduce an arbitrary v6 address not belonging to me (the systems are not productive, yet), via, say, Loopback1, this will be distributed to all IS-IS peers despite the route-map. I first suspected my lack experience with v6 access-lists and tried various permutations of source/destination. Then prefix- instead of access-lists - to no avail. Then it dawned at me and I tried: > route-map redistribute6 deny 5 This should prevent any connected routes from being injected into IS-IS, right? Nope - all connected interfaces are visible on all peer routers. Looks like the IS-IS routing process is ignoring the route-map alltogether. 12.2(33)SXI12 and 12.2(33)SXJ6 both show this behaviour. Am I missing something more general, here? Or can it be remotely possible that this is not yet implemented [tm]? Thanks for any hints and best regards Patrick -- punkt.de GmbH * Kaiserallee 13a * 76133 Karlsruhe Tel. 0721 9109 0 * Fax 0721 9109 100 [email protected] http://www.punkt.de Gf: Jürgen Egeling AG Mannheim 108285
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
