On Tue, Apr 04, 2006 at 11:46:24AM +0100, tony sarendal wrote: > On 04/04/06, Falk Brockerhoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Am 29.03.2006 um 14:32 schrieb Falk Brockerhoff: > > > > >> that, again, is sth nobody ever asked for or missed :) > > >> however, the (completely untested except for compilation) diff below > > >> should add "set nexthop self". > > > > > > Ui, you're realy fast :-) Thank you for your quick response. I'll > > > compile this and test it with a spare old Cisco-Router as > > > "Development-Core" next weekend. I'll give you a feedback about it. > > > > The next-hop patch is working perfectly, thanks! > > > > But I've got another problem: actually I'm announcing the following > > prefixes from a "testing core"-router to the border-router running > > openBGPd: > > > > Dest/mask Next-Hop Med LocalPref > > 192.168.0.0/24 10.0.0.6 --- 100 > > 192.168.0.0/29 10.0.0.6 --- 100 > > 10.0.0.4/30 10.0.0.6 --- 100 > > 192.168.1.153/32 10.0.0.6 --- 100 > > > > - 192.168.0.0/24 is an aggregated prefix, caused by 192.168.0.1/29. > > - 10.0.0.4/30 is from the transfer-network between my core (10.0.0.6) > > and the openbgpd-router (10.0.0.5). > > - 192.168.1.153/32 is the loopback-address of the core. > > > > In the openbgpd.conf I configured "network 192.168.0.0/24". This > > prefix is correctly announced by openbgpd to my external neighbor. > > But on my open BGPd-router I can't ping the address 192.168.0.1, > > which is configured on a interface at the core-router: > > > > $ ping 192.168.0.1 > > PING 192.168.0.1 (192.168.0.1): 56 data bytes > > ping: sendto: No route to host > > ping: wrote 192.168.0.1 64 chars, ret=-1 > > > > > > $ bgpctl sh rib 192.168.0.1 > > flags: * = Valid, > = Selected, I = via IBGP, A = Announced > > origin: i = IGP, e = EGP, ? = Incomplete > > > > flags destination gateway lpref med aspath origin > > AI*> 192.168.0.0/24 0.0.0.0 100 0 i > > I* 192.168.0.0/24 10.0.0.6 100 0 i > > > > Any idea, what's going on here? > > > > my bgpd.conf: > > > > AS 64400 > > router-id 192.168.1.150 > > network 192.168.0.0/24 > > > Why do you have network 192.168.0.0/24 in bgpd.conf if you already get > that prefix from the core router ? > > Above you could see 192.168.0.0/24 from the core router and the local box, > the local /24 was chosen as best path. > > Some pure guess work here: > Do you have a /24 network statement in your bgpd.conf but no real route > for it ? Maybe this in bgpd means that you will announce that /24, > basically beating the /24 you are receiving from the core, and thus not > installing that /24 into the routing table. >
Yes. Announced networks will not install routes in the FIB additionally they do not need a present route in the FIB (this is different from most other routing suites). So you either need to install a static route for 192.168.0.0/24, remove the "network 192.168.0.0/24" on the border router, twiddle with localpref to make the core router prefix prefered or use some IGP. -- :wq Claudio
