I am not getting updates even between the PE and CE for RIP. I even added and advertised another loopback to try to rule out a summarization/mask issue. Here is my rip config:
R2 router rip version 2 no auto-summary ! address-family ipv4 vrf VPNA redistribute bgp 125 metric 3 network 150.50.0.0 network 200.0.0.0 network 222.222.222.0 no auto-summary version 2 exit-address-family ! R4 router rip version 2 network 150.50.0.0 network 200.0.0.0 no auto-summary Here is what I am seeing when I debug rip on R2: *Jan 24 22:37:47.599: RIP: received v2 update from 150.50.24.1 on Serial0/1/0.24 *Jan 24 22:37:47.599: 200.0.0.4/32 via 0.0.0.0 in 1 hops R2# *Jan 24 22:37:56.475: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Serial0/1/0.24 (150.50.24.2) *Jan 24 22:37:56.475: RIP: build update entries - suppressing null update Here is what I see on R4 *Jan 24 22:59:26.751: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Loopback0 (200.0.0.4) *Jan 24 22:59:26.751: RIP: build update entries *Jan 24 22:59:26.751: 150.50.24.0/30 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0 *Jan 24 22:59:26.751: RIP: ignored v2 packet from 200.0.0.4 (sourced from one of our addresses) Help! On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 4:24 PM, marc abel <[email protected]> wrote: > I started from scratch and did the lab all over again and I am having > the same results. I have it checked my config against the proctor > guide and everything appears correct to me. I have it loaded on the > rack now if anyone has any troubleshooting tips for me. > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Bryan Bartik <[email protected]> wrote: >> Okay, well if you get your lab back up we can troubleshoot. I guess there >> are many things it could be :) The key to remember is whenever you create an >> address-family under EIGRP, you need to specify an AS number. Calling it a >> process number may not be technically correct but that's what I call it. I >> have never tried to see if you could have neighbor under the native EIGRP >> process...perhaps in that case it still acts as an AS#. >> >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 11:31 AM, marc abel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Thank you Bryan. >>> >>> 1. I thought that was the general rule with bgp but was confused by >>> the answer to 29.4 which has it under the address-fam ipv4. >>> >>> 2. My rack session is over but I had done a show ip bgp ... and yes I >>> got 2 routes instead of the 3 they list in the solution guide. >>> >>> I got: >>> 200.0.0.7/32 >>> and >>> 150.50.78.0/24 which is really strange because the link was a /30 and >>> the proctor guide was showing both a /30 and /32 route for that >>> prefix. >>> >>> None of the routers beyond R8 could see either of those routes. >>> >>> 3. Does putting the address family under Eigrp automatically make it >>> treat the number as a process id, or is it the adding of the >>> autonomous-system command? >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Bryan Bartik <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > Marc, >>> > >>> > 1. You will always configure remote-as under BGP, sometimes commands are >>> > allowed under the AFI but they end up under BGP anyway. These are >>> > session >>> > commands (e.g. remote-as, update-source, etc) and take effect for all >>> > the >>> > AFI enabled for that neighbor. >>> > >>> > 2. In this case, the top level EIGRP number is more of a process >>> > number...it >>> > is confusing at first, I agree. is R8 learning any VPN routes? Do a >>> > "show ip >>> > bgp vpnv4 all"...what do you see? >>> > >>> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 8:12 PM, marc abel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Two questions: >>> >> >>> >> 1. Can anyone explain to my why you sometimes configure your "neighbor >>> >> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx remote-as xxx" under the bgp process and sometimes >>> >> it's under the ipv4 address family? >>> >> >>> >> 2. I am having trouble getting the correct routes to show up for task >>> >> 28.8-9. I have pasted the relevant portions of the configs below. R8 >>> >> is a PE, and R7 a CE. I am not getting routes exchanged either into >>> >> mpls,or out of mpls. I am also unclear on the purpose of making the >>> >> eigrp as 689, and then using the command "autonous-system 7" why not >>> >> just do router eigrp 7? >>> >> >>> >> R8 Config >>> >> ________________ >>> >> >>> >> router eigrp 689 >>> >> no auto-summary >>> >> ! >>> >> address-family ipv4 vrf VPNB >>> >> redistribute bgp 689 metric 1500 1000 255 1 1500 >>> >> network 150.50.78.2 0.0.0.0 >>> >> no auto-summary >>> >> autonomous-system 7 >>> >> exit-address-family >>> >> ! >>> >> router ospf 100 >>> >> log-adjacency-changes >>> >> passive-interface default >>> >> no passive-interface FastEthernet0/0 >>> >> network 150.50.89.0 0.0.0.255 area 0 >>> >> network 200.0.0.8 0.0.0.0 area 0 >>> >> ! >>> >> router bgp 689 >>> >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >>> >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >>> >> neighbor 200.0.0.9 remote-as 689 >>> >> neighbor 200.0.0.9 update-source Loopback0 >>> >> ! >>> >> address-family ipv4 >>> >> neighbor 200.0.0.9 activate >>> >> no auto-summary >>> >> no synchronization >>> >> network 200.0.0.8 mask 255.255.255.255 >>> >> exit-address-family >>> >> ! >>> >> address-family vpnv4 >>> >> neighbor 200.0.0.9 activate >>> >> neighbor 200.0.0.9 send-community extended >>> >> exit-address-family >>> >> ! >>> >> address-family ipv4 vrf VPNB >>> >> redistribute eigrp 7 >>> >> no synchronization >>> >> exit-address-family >>> >> >>> >> R7 >>> >> _________ >>> >> router eigrp 7 >>> >> network 150.50.78.1 0.0.0.0 >>> >> network 200.0.0.7 0.0.0.0 >>> >> no auto-summary >>> >> _______________________________________________ >>> >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, >>> >> please >>> >> visit www.ipexpert.com >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Bryan Bartik >>> > CCIE #23707 (R&S, SP), CCNP >>> > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. >>> > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com >>> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Bryan Bartik >> CCIE #23707 (R&S, SP), CCNP >> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. >> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com >> > _______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
