Hi Balaji,
May be I am missing something but I am talking about both static and OSPF
route on same router. In ur example, Its assuming that static route is
added on Router B rather than A.
Any other quagga Guru, who can pls clarify my query here ?
Rgds
Atul
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 7:56 PM, Balaji Gurudoss <balaji...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Atul
>
> This would happen with any protocol and not with ospf because this is an
> expected behaviour. I believe the following is what you are looking at
>
> Router A-----Router B
>
> You have configured a static route in Router B and are doing a
> redistribute static into OSPF/BGP in Router B. The show ip route on Router
> B would show the route as a BGP/OSPF learned route. Now on router B you
> configure a static route with the same prefix pointing to a next-hop and in
> RTM the newly created static route would be marked as the Best route
> instead of BGP as the static route has more preference.
>
> Now as per BGP/OSPF is concerned, 50.1.1.0/24 is still the best route on
> the router where the route was originated i.e Router B. On router A it
> isn't the best route because a static route for the same prefix has been
> created. In this scenario why should Router B withdraw the route ? How
> would router B know that there is a static route existing in Router A for
> the same destination ?
>
> Hope you get my point.
>
> Thanks,
> - Balaji
>
>
> On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:07 AM, Atul Chowdhry <atu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Balaji,
>> What do you mean when you say implicit withdraw ? I am seeing this in
>> very simple topology of two routers running ospf and connected back to back.
>>
>> Rgds
>> Atul
>>
>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Balaji Gurudoss <balaji...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ideally speaking the implicit withdraw would happen when the new one
>>> gets selected and old one gets validated. Are you seeing this issue with a
>>> very simple topology with two routers connected back to back running OSPF
>>> or do you see it in a specific topology ?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> - Balaji
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 10:27 PM, Atul Chowdhry <atu...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>> I am using quagga release 1.2.1. I see one potential problem in
>>>> rib_process function related to withdrawal of redistributed route from
>>>> zebra.
>>>> Problematic line is marked in bold letters.
>>>> Suppose a prefix was already learned via OSPF. Now if I try to add a
>>>> static route for same prefix, I hit this code.
>>>> In this case. old_selected will point to OSPF and new_selected will
>>>> point to Static. Now since ospf route is not the selected one, don;t we
>>>> always have to withdraw this ospf route from clients redistributing
>>>> OSPF. Why there is extra check there ?
>>>> I also tested this locally. If I comment this if statement then I see
>>>> zebra sending delete for OSPF route else not.
>>>>
>>>> Pls give advice.
>>>>
>>>> Rgds
>>>> Atul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> /* Redistribute SELECTED entry */
>>>> 1308 if (old_selected != new_selected
>>>> 1309 || (new_selected && CHECK_FLAG (new_selected->status,
>>>> RIB_ENTRY_CHANGED)))
>>>> 1310 {
>>>> 1311 if (old_selected)
>>>> 1312 {
>>>> 1313 * if (! new_selected) >>>> Why this if statement
>>>> is there ?? I fell this shouldn't be there.*
>>>> 1314 redistribute_delete (&rn->p, old_selected);
>>>> 1315 if (old_selected != new_selected)
>>>> 1316 UNSET_FLAG (old_selected->flags, ZEBRA_FLAG_SELECTED);
>>>> 1317 }
>>>> 1318
>>>> 1319 if (new_selected)
>>>> 1320 {
>>>> 1321 /* Install new or replace existing redistributed entry */
>>>> 1322 SET_FLAG (new_selected->flags, ZEBRA_FLAG_SELECTED);
>>>> 1323 redistribute_add (&rn->p, new_selected);
>>>> 1324 }
>>>> 1325 }
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Quagga-users mailing list
>>>> Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
>>>> https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Quagga-users mailing list
Quagga-users@lists.quagga.net
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-users
