No, but there is some newer enterprise stuff that can help freshen the
old mare a bit I suppose. ;)

Thanks.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Adam Tajer [mailto:adam.ta...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:41 PM
To: Harry Reynolds; juniper-nsp
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Missing BGP Routes

By the way...Harry, are there any plans to release a 2nd edition of this
classic book?

Thanks,
Adam


On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Harry Reynolds <ha...@juniper.net>
wrote:


        Cool. Note that keep-all should have left them hidden in rib-in,
which
        can assist in troubleshooting such issues.
        
         Regards
        
        
        
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Eric Van Tol [mailto:e...@atlantech.net]
        Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:03 PM
        To: Harry Reynolds; juniper-nsp
        Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Missing BGP Routes
        
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Harry Reynolds [mailto:ha...@juniper.net]
        > Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:46 PM
        > To: Eric Van Tol; juniper-nsp
        > Subject: RE: [j-nsp] Missing BGP Routes
        >
        > Normally an as path loop or other sanity check results in this
state.
        > From the config below does not seem this is the case. Perhaps
add
        > keep-all, restart/soft clear session, and then display hidden.
Perhaps
        
        > something will jump out.
        >
        > Does tracing show any errors when the routes are processed?
        > Unreachable next hop normally is just hidden so does not seem
the case
        
        > here. Should not matter, but I normally doe not specify
peer-as for an
        int group.
        > Again should not break things but worth trying w/o.
        >
        
        So, I tried tracing again and you all were correct.  There was a
BGP
        group on edge01 with the cluster-id of 192.168.206.129, which
was
        causing the route to drop.  I believe my problem with tracing
was that I
        was not tracing the right information and using a prefix filter
under
        the 'route' flag.
        
        Thanks to all who responded.  I now know that routes with
cluster-id
        issues will be dropped with no addition to the RIB.
        
        -evt
        _______________________________________________
        juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
        https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
        

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

Reply via email to