Is this just a case of BGP loop prevention working as expected? If I understand correctly you are learning it from AS12345 but also wish to announce it to a diff neighbor in AS12345? If so then try 'as-override' option.
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 2:06 PM Jason Lixfeld <jason-j...@lixfeld.ca> wrote: > Hello, > > I’m trying to work through solving why a BGP prefix 126.126.126.0/24 > announced to pe2 in vrf foo isn’t announced to EBGP neighbour 10.108.35.254 > on pe1 that is also in vrf foo. > > jlixfeld@pe1# run show route protocol bgp table foo.inet.0 > 126.126.126.0/24 > > foo.inet.0: 41 destinations, 51 routes (35 active, 0 holddown, 9 hidden) > + = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both > > 126.126.126.0/24 *[BGP/170] 03:18:28, MED 0, localpref 990, from > 10.15.48.253 > AS path: 12345 I, validation-state: unverified > > to 10.15.51.248 via xe-0/1/5.0, Push 91 > to 10.15.49.83 via xe-0/1/0.0, Push 91, Push 18(top) > [BGP/170] 03:18:28, MED 0, localpref 990, from > 10.15.48.254 > AS path: 12345 I, validation-state: unverified > > to 10.15.51.248 via xe-0/1/5.0, Push 91 > to 10.15.49.83 via xe-0/1/0.0, Push 91, Push 18(top) > > [edit] > jlixfeld@pe1# > > 126.126.126.0/24 is received from as12345 on pe2. pe2 announces the > prefix to RRs 10.15.48.253 and 10.15.48.254, and the RRs announce the > prefix to pe1. From here, I’m trying to announce it to EBGP neighbour > 10.108.35.254, which I can’t seem to make work: > > jlixfeld@pe1# run show route advertising-protocol bgp 10.108.35.254 > > foo.inet.0: 41 destinations, 51 routes (35 active, 0 holddown, 9 hidden) > Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS path > * 10.137.128.0/21 Self I > * 10.137.136.0/21 Self I > * 10.137.144.0/21 Self I > * 10.137.152.0/21 Self I > * 10.207.192.0/19 Self I > * 10.15.48.0/22 Self I > * 10.15.52.0/22 Self I > * 10.15.56.0/22 Self I > * 10.15.60.0/22 Self I > * 10.98.192.0/20 Self I > * 10.9.192.0/19 Self I > * 10.45.192.0/20 Self I > * 10.192.44.0/22 Self I > * 10.59.160.0/20 Self I > * 10.249.160.0/22 Self I > * 10.68.120.0/21 Self I > * 10.167.152.0/21 Self I > * 10.175.212.0/22 Self I > * 10.223.160.0/19 Self I > * 10.253.136.0/21 Self I > > [edit] > jlixfeld@pe1# > > (FWIW, the prefixes that are being announced are anchored on pe1 as static > routes) > > My understanding is that since this is a BGP prefix, it’s default export > policy is to advertise all active BGP routes to all BGP speakers. But, to > try and work through whether it was an export policy issue anyway, I > deactivated the export policy on the session to 10.108.35.254, which was > ineffective. > > Maybe there are additional default behaviours that are different than what > I’m more familiar with in IOS/XR? > > Maybe it is actually a policy issue, and I’m just not aware of what’s > necessary for the prefix get announced. I was hoping that there was an > equivalent to show route receive-protocol bgp <neighbor> hidden table <..> > detail that would show why a prefix may not be getting announced to an EBGP > neighbor. IE: this command would show the reasons why a received route is > hidden, ie: "Hidden reason: rejected by import policy”. > > Would someone be able to point me in the direction of where I might need > to look to clear up what I’m missing? > > Thanks! > > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > -- [stillwa...@gmail.com ~]$ cat .signature cat: .signature: No such file or directory [stillwa...@gmail.com ~]$ _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
