On 18 May 2015 7:21 am, "Marian Ďurkovič" <m...@bts.sk> wrote: > > On Sun, 17 May 2015 13:48:42 +0200, Gert Doering wrote > > RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:Cisco-F-X#sh cef 194.97.129.1 > > Sat May 16 23:26:20.777 MEDST > > 194.97.129.1/32, version 76418887, internal 0x14000001 (ptr 0xa1045a14) > > [1], 0x0 (0x0), 0x0 (0x0) > > Updated May 9 14:43:16.617 Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, > > precedence n/a, priority 4 BGP Attribute: id: 0xc4eb, Local id: 0xbc96, > > Origin AS: 65300, Next Hop AS: 65300 > > > > via 10.10.11.45, 5 dependencies, recursive [flags 0x6000] > > path-idx 0 [0x9eac8c88 0x0] next hop 10.10.11.45 via 10.10.11.45/32 > > via 10.10.11.241, 5 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext, bgp-best-ext [flags > 0x6060] > > path-idx 1 [0x9e5a92c0 0x0] next hop 10.10.11.241 via 10.10.11.241/32 > > > > ... and indeed, it nicely load-shares packets between the primary > > service instance (behind 10.10.11.45) and the secondary service instance > > (on the base IP 10.10.11.241). > > Hi Gert, > > the fact that both entries are present in RIB and CEF tables is expected > behaviour. It's part of the new design, where both active and backup paths are > preinstalled into the CEF table, which allows much faster convergence when the > active path disappears. Note that the backup path has different CEF flags, which > should instruct the forwarding engine *not* to use it when another regular path > is present in CEF table.
Hi, If that's the case I find it strange why that's now the default behaviour. Surely that's the point of 'additional-paths' to control what routes you want to have backups for. In my case I definitely wouldn't have wanted backup routes for everything by default. Regards, Dan _______________________________________________ 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/