Thanks all with your suggestions, I am into my lab now trying each of them, I
have to do it before a technical meeting tomorrow !
Patrice Ngassam
Ceritified Cisco CCNP, CCDP, CCIP
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:21:42 -0700
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] BGP design question
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
I am NOT trying to argue here, but as an employee what would you do when your
manager asks you to do a strange config like that?
Patrice,
You have been given few solutions here, you should try each one of them and see
for yourself. The best solution is the most simple solution, and when you test
the most simple solution and a little more involved one, you will see that you
have absolutely nothing to gain by choosing the involved solution. BTW, this is
just my recommendation.
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Scott Morris <[email protected]> wrote:
Not so much a threat as just an oddity. We strive so much to have our networks
evolve to a self-healing method. We build in redundancy so that WE do not NEED
to do all the work. Let your network work for you. And here's someone who
wants to work for the network. ;)
Patrice Ngassam wrote:
You are very funny Scott, I was also chocked when the customer told me that
manual switchback was his requirement. Why is it strange for you? Is it a
threat for network design best practices?
Patrice Ngassam
Ceritified Cisco CCNP, CCDP, CCIP
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 16:58:17 -0400
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] BGP design question
Which this would most certainly cover his strange requirement of manual
switchback.
On the other hand, could we run like IOS 10.3 or something? i seem to recall
that more things were less automagical back then! (smirk)
Scott
Marko Milivojevic wrote:
Now, expanding on this we need solve additional requirement from the
original post. How to prevent peer from coming back up. Well, for that
we could probably use EEM. Let's take a look.
event manager applet DISABLE_PEER
event routing network 2.2.2.2/32 type remove
action 10 cli command "enable"
action 20 cli command "configure terminal"
action 30 cli command "router bgp 1"
action 40 cli command "neighbor 2.2.2.2 shutdown"
action 50 cli command "end"
!
Enabling peer on R2.
R1#sh ip bgp sum
BGP router identifier 1.1.1.1, local AS number 1
BGP table version is 1, main routing table version 1
Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ
Up/Down State/PfxRcd
2.2.2.2 4 2 6 5 1 0 0
00:00:37 0
Killing the interface on R2 here.
*Mar 29 01:33:59.679: %TRACKING-5-STATE: 1 ip sla 1 reachability Up->Down
*Mar 29 01:33:59.683: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor 2.2.2.2 Down Route to peer lost
*Mar 29 01:33:59.747: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by on
vty0 (EEM:DISABLE_PEER)
--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
YES! We include 400 hours of REAL rack
time with our Blended Learning Solution!
Mailto: [email protected]
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 17:05, Marko Milivojevic <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 17:00, Narbik Kocharians <[email protected]> wrote:
Totally understand that, but i did not see any mention of OSPF or ISIS.
Enjoy.
R1:
interface Loopback0
B ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
B ip address 12.12.12.1 255.255.255.0
!
ip sla 1
B icmp-echo 12.12.12.2
B frequency 5
!
ip sla schedule 1 start-time now life forever
!
track 1 ip sla 1 reachability
B default-state down
!
ip route 2.2.2.2 255.255.255.255 12.12.12.2 track 1
!
route-map Neighbor-Alive
B match source-protocol static
!
router bgp 1
B neighbor 2.2.2.2 remote-as 2
B neighbor 2.2.2.2 update-source Loopback0
B neighbor 2.2.2.2 ebgp-multihop 2
B neighbor 2.2.2.2 fall-over route-map Neighbor-Alive
!
R2:
interface GigabitEthernet0/0
B ip address 12.12.12.2 255.255.255.0
!
router bgp 2
B neighbor 1.1.1.1 remote-as 1
B neighbor 1.1.1.1 ebgp-multihop 2
B neighbor 1.1.1.1 update-source Loopback0
!
Notice what happens on R1 as soon as I shut down the port on R2 (there
is a switch between them).
*Mar 29 00:59:19.679: %TRACKING-5-STATE: 1 ip sla 1 reachability Up->Down
*Mar 29 00:59:19.683: %BGP-5-ADJCHANGE: neighbor 2.2.2.2 Down Route to peer lost
--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
YES! We include 400 hours of REAL rack
time with our Blended Learning Solution!
Mailto: [email protected]
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Web: http://www.ipexpert.com/
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
_______________________________________________________________________
Subscription information may be found at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Télécharger en toute sécurité sur Internet ? La solution avec Internet Explorer
8
--
Narbik Kocharians
CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
www.MicronicsTraining.com
Sr. Technical Instructor
YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
Training And Remote Racks available
_________________________________________________________________
Consultez gratuitement vos emails Orange, Gmail, Free, ... directement dans
HOTMAIL !
http://www.windowslive.fr/hotmail/agregation/_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit
www.ipexpert.com
