On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 02:28:56PM +0200, Jan-Philipp Litza wrote: > > Important info was 'gateway recursive' option on direct BGP sessions, > > so all three BGP sessions generate recursive routes. > > There are only two sessions involved. Or do you mean sessions as in > "protocol configurations"?
Two, you are right. > And my understanding was that this setup cannot work without "gateway > recursive". Can't read from your comment whether this is correct or not. > > >> so I'm not sure what to answer to "what routes" > > > > For that i meant non-BGP routes that are used to resolve BGP next hops. > > > > Mainly 'show route for 2001:db8:2::2 all' to get route for 2001:db8:2::2 > > next hop from your first example. > > Ah, sure: > > 2001:db8:2::/64 unicast [direct1 2019-09-24] * (240) > dev I2 > Type: device univ Hmm, i cannot imagine how you could end with gateway fe80:1::100. In this setup it should be 2001:db8:2::2. Don't you have e.g. a route for 2001:db8:2::2/128 with that gateway? Or any other route with gateway fe80:1::100? Do you get the same result even if you disable and enable RR-R1 session? -- Elen sila lumenn' omentielvo Ondrej 'Santiago' Zajicek (email: santi...@crfreenet.org) OpenPGP encrypted e-mails preferred (KeyID 0x11DEADC3, wwwkeys.pgp.net) "To err is human -- to blame it on a computer is even more so."
