On Monday, December 09, 2013 03:43:08 PM Lukas Tribus wrote: > Personally I exclusively use prefix-lists in route-maps > related to routing protocols; I hate representing > prefixes in ACL's. I understand that this doesn't fix > the problem, but it may be something to look into to > simplify the configuration.
> Then again, this may be a matter of taste ... I typically stay way from redistribution, apart from two scenarios: 1. l3vpn's, since redistribution is local to an l3vpn context. 2. Anycast DNS, because IS-IS in Quagga is unusable. So OSPF on a FreeBSD Quagga installation, talking to OSPF on a router, and the router then redistributes (with prefix list matching, of course) that data into IS-IS for the rest of the network to see. > Perhaps, the network is redistributed by another > mechanism and you are looking at the problem from the > wrong angle. For that matter: passive-interface in ISIS > has a different behavior than in OSPF. I'm thinking the OP is either running IS-IS on external links, or running passive-interface on them. Either option will guarantee external routes being introduced into the network. If you don't want to that, run BGP's next-hop-self and forget about IS-IS on the external links. My recommendation is to run IS-IS on internal links and Loopbacks only, and put the rest into iBGP. Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/