WAS RE: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
I seem to recall that the Administrative Distance of static routes that specify a local interface has differed between 0 and 1 depending on IOS version. I have a hand written note that (I think) says the value is 0 for 11.3 and 12.0; but is now 1 for newer IOS versions. If true, your results will depend on which IOS your routers are running. I'd appreciate comments for those who have more specific info. I'll see if I can find time to experiment. -Original Message- From: Munit Singla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi Godswill, Thanx for reply.I agree with u,but Still the doubt persists if both the commands are used then both entries come to the route table.As per your and mine theory also only better administrative distance should come into the route table,but here both are introduced into the route table ,as it seems it has administrative distance of 1 for default gateway of its own interface(obviosly zero is preffered then one)? Why both entries in route table. As confusion is creating from different answers so please reply ,so that all confusions are over. Regards, Munit Godswill Oletu wrote: Hi, Static routes can either have the AD of 1 or 0 depending on the way you add them to your router. e.g lates RouterA interface FE0=192.168.0.1/27 and it is connected to RouterB FE1=192.168.0.2/27 FE3=10.1.0.1/24. To define route to 10.1.0.1/24 on RouterA you have two methods. 1. RouterA# IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.2 (AD=1) 2. RouterA#IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 FE0 (AD=0) If both commands are entered option 2 will be the prefered route. So you are correct, choose the one you prefer, it also depends whether you want to do load balancing, floating static route, etc... Regards. Godswill Oletu - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59629t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: WAS RE: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Great Daniel, But I need clarification on this part me be if u have some documnet or some link please send me the link...Thanx for the help.anybody has comments since it seems a trivial question but not. Regards, Munit Daniel Cotts wrote: I seem to recall that the Administrative Distance of static routes that specify a local interface has differed between 0 and 1 depending on IOS version. I have a hand written note that (I think) says the value is 0 for 11.3 and 12.0; but is now 1 for newer IOS versions. If true, your results will depend on which IOS your routers are running. I'd appreciate comments for those who have more specific info. I'll see if I can find time to experiment. -Original Message- From: Munit Singla [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi Godswill, Thanx for reply.I agree with u,but Still the doubt persists if both the commands are used then both entries come to the route table.As per your and mine theory also only better administrative distance should come into the route table,but here both are introduced into the route table ,as it seems it has administrative distance of 1 for default gateway of its own interface(obviosly zero is preffered then one)? Why both entries in route table. As confusion is creating from different answers so please reply ,so that all confusions are over. Regards, Munit Godswill Oletu wrote: Hi, Static routes can either have the AD of 1 or 0 depending on the way you add them to your router. e.g lates RouterA interface FE0=192.168.0.1/27 and it is connected to RouterB FE1=192.168.0.2/27 FE3=10.1.0.1/24. To define route to 10.1.0.1/24 on RouterA you have two methods. 1. RouterA# IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.2 (AD=1) 2. RouterA#IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 FE0 (AD=0) If both commands are entered option 2 will be the prefered route. So you are correct, choose the one you prefer, it also depends whether you want to do load balancing, floating static route, etc... Regards. Godswill Oletu - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59630t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59533t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or not. all directly connected interface have an AD of 0 - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:44 PM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59537t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi Tunde, Thanx for reply but can u tell me that I know that this static route to my own interface should have AD of 0 or am i wrong.Its mentioned in all the books. can u clarify it or give me some link where its mentioned as u have written. Regards, Munit Singla Tunde Kalejaiye wrote: all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or not. all directly connected interface have an AD of 0 - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 4:44 PM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59538t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or not. all directly connected interface have an AD of 0 Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit When using static routes: A route pointing to another IP address has an AD of 1 A route pointing to an interface has an AD of 0 -chris Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59560t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi, Static routes can either have the AD of 1 or 0 depending on the way you add them to your router. e.g lates RouterA interface FE0=192.168.0.1/27 and it is connected to RouterB FE1=192.168.0.2/27 FE3=10.1.0.1/24. To define route to 10.1.0.1/24 on RouterA you have two methods. 1. RouterA# IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.2 (AD=1) 2. RouterA#IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 FE0 (AD=0) If both commands are entered option 2 will be the prefered route. So you are correct, choose the one you prefer, it also depends whether you want to do load balancing, floating static route, etc... Regards. Godswill Oletu - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59561t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi Godswill, Thanx for reply.I agree with u,but Still the doubt persists if both the commands are used then both entries come to the route table.As per your and mine theory also only better administrative distance should come into the route table,but here both are introduced into the route table ,as it seems it has administrative distance of 1 for default gateway of its own interface(obviosly zero is preffered then one)? Why both entries in route table. As confusion is creating from different answers so please reply ,so that all confusions are over. Regards, Munit Godswill Oletu wrote: Hi, Static routes can either have the AD of 1 or 0 depending on the way you add them to your router. e.g lates RouterA interface FE0=192.168.0.1/27 and it is connected to RouterB FE1=192.168.0.2/27 FE3=10.1.0.1/24. To define route to 10.1.0.1/24 on RouterA you have two methods. 1. RouterA# IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.2 (AD=1) 2. RouterA#IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 FE0 (AD=0) If both commands are entered option 2 will be the prefered route. So you are correct, choose the one you prefer, it also depends whether you want to do load balancing, floating static route, etc... Regards. Godswill Oletu - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59565t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi Chris, Hi the why its showing in the rout table.I have already given my route table.Please refer it and do clear my confusion. Regards, Munit chris kane wrote: all static routes have an AD of 1...whether it is using ur interface or not. all directly connected interface have an AD of 0 Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit When using static routes: A route pointing to another IP address has an AD of 1 A route pointing to an interface has an AD of 0 -chris Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59568t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533]
Hi Munit, Let assume you put both coomands say: 1. IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 172.16.0.1 2. IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 FE1 since the AD of 1 is 1 and that of 2 is 0, option 2 will be the prefered route for any routing activity to network 172.16.0.1. The route defined by option 1 will be a floating route to the same network, it will not be in your rotuing table. Remember the routing rule, 'Only prefered routes are selected and inserted into the routing table option one will only show in the routing table if by some means option become unavailable or fails. Try then on your router and see. If you enter both commands on ur router and implement 'Sh ip route' you will only see the route defined by option 2, however if you remove the option 2 command, the route defined by option 1 will surface in your 'sh ip route' I hope this will help you. Regards. Godswill - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Godswill Oletu Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 5:56 PM Subject: Re: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi Godswill, Thanx for reply.I agree with u,but Still the doubt persists if both the commands are used then both entries come to the route table.As per your and mine theory also only better administrative distance should come into the route table,but here both are introduced into the route table ,as it seems it has administrative distance of 1 for default gateway of its own interface(obviosly zero is preffered then one)? Why both entries in route table. As confusion is creating from different answers so please reply ,so that all confusions are over. Regards, Munit Godswill Oletu wrote: Hi, Static routes can either have the AD of 1 or 0 depending on the way you add them to your router. e.g lates RouterA interface FE0=192.168.0.1/27 and it is connected to RouterB FE1=192.168.0.2/27 FE3=10.1.0.1/24. To define route to 10.1.0.1/24 on RouterA you have two methods. 1. RouterA# IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.0.2 (AD=1) 2. RouterA#IP route 10.0.0.0 255.255.255.0 FE0 (AD=0) If both commands are entered option 2 will be the prefered route. So you are correct, choose the one you prefer, it also depends whether you want to do load balancing, floating static route, etc... Regards. Godswill Oletu - Original Message - From: Munit Singla To: Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2002 11:44 AM Subject: Strange problem of route table [7:59533] Hi all, Can anybody tell me when I add static route to my default network it shows with Administrative distance of 1,whereas we know that static routes to our own interface have AD. of zero. Example C 10.77.152.128/25 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.77.152.129 is directly connected, FastEthernet1/0 Its showing here with administrative distance of 1 the route with default gateway of FastEthernet1/0. Please do clear me where I am wrong Thanx in advance Munit Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=59573t=59533 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Route table question [7:32640]
I have my ISPs internal route showing as a connected route in my local route table. There is no exchange of dynamic routes or static. I am not using them for DHCP. They can't explain it either but I am hoping someone here has seen this before. Output listed below. Gateway of last resort is 0.0.0.0 to network 0.0.0.0 192.168.192.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 192.168.192.7 is directly connected, Dialer1 ((suspect route)) 208.xxx.xxx.xxx/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 208.xxx.xxx.xxx is directly connected, Dialer1 C192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, Dialer1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=32640t=32640 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Route table question [7:32640]
In your running config do you have a statement like 'ip route 192.168.192.7 255.255.255.255 dialer 1' ? The interface, while logical as opposed to physical, acts as any other interface. And the rule that a static route to an interface is considered to be directly connected still applies. Andy Barkl wrote: I have my ISPs internal route showing as a connected route in my local route table. There is no exchange of dynamic routes or static. I am not using them for DHCP. They can't explain it either but I am hoping someone here has seen this before. Output listed below. Gateway of last resort is 0.0.0.0 to network 0.0.0.0 192.168.192.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 192.168.192.7 is directly connected, Dialer1 ((suspect route)) 208.xxx.xxx.xxx/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 208.xxx.xxx.xxx is directly connected, Dialer1 C192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, Dialer1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=32644t=32640 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Route table question [7:32660]
I am baffled. There is an internal route of my ISPs showing as a connected route in my local route table. There is no exchange of dynamic or static routes. I am not using their DHCP. They can't explain it, but I am hoping someone here has seen this. Gateway of last resort is 0.0.0.0 to network 0.0.0.0 192.168.192.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 192.168.192.7 is directly connected, Dialer1 ((suspect route)) 208.xxx.xxx.xxx/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 208.xxx.xxx.xxx is directly connected, Dialer1 C192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, Dialer1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=32660t=32660 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route table question [7:32660]
Are you using PPP on the dialer interface? PPP can install a route on your router. Tony M. #6172 - Original Message - From: Andy Barkl To: Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 5:39 PM Subject: Route table question [7:32660] I am baffled. There is an internal route of my ISPs showing as a connected route in my local route table. There is no exchange of dynamic or static routes. I am not using their DHCP. They can't explain it, but I am hoping someone here has seen this. Gateway of last resort is 0.0.0.0 to network 0.0.0.0 192.168.192.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 192.168.192.7 is directly connected, Dialer1 ((suspect route)) 208.xxx.xxx.xxx/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets C 208.xxx.xxx.xxx is directly connected, Dialer1 C192.168.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0 S* 0.0.0.0/0 is directly connected, Dialer1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=32663t=32660 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
display route table in numerical order? [7:27541]
Could be a silly question, but I'll ask anyway. Is there a way to display the routing table in numerical order? That would make it a lot easier to find routes when displaying the list. Thanks for your help. Robert Provost Data Communications Engineer Genesis Health Ventures Phone: 610-925-1147 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=27541t=27541 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IP OSPF database to IP Route table question [7:21000]
I have been working with a number of differnt OSPF configurations (CCBootcamp labs 12) and it seems that I always run into a situation where my routers have the entire OSPF database but the routes do not get injected into the routing table. After a series of shutting interfaces and a couple of router reboots they will then appear Note: This is strictly OSPF, no redistribution Question: What is the process for extracting routes from the OSPF database and placing the routes in the routing table ? I have read through the Cisco design guide but still cant seem to pull it together Any help would be appreciated.. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21000t=21000 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [IP OSPF database to IP Route table question [7:21000]
A couple of things to note when comparing the OSPF database to the resultant routing table. According to the OSPF specification, an ABR will not install any Network Summary LSAs (LSA type 3s) that it originates into it's routing table. Also, an ABR will only install Network Summary LSAs that are present in the backbone, it will ignore any that are present in non-backbone areas. ASBRs will never install external LSAs that they originate either. Other tricks with external LSAs are that they will only be installed if the route to reach the forwarding address (assuming a non-zero forwarding address) is an intra or inter area route. NSSA external forwarding addresses need to be reachable via intra-area routes. I guess a good thing to ask would be what routes are not being installed, if you could send the database and routing table I hopefully will be able to tell you why. routerkid wrote: I have been working with a number of differnt OSPF configurations (CCBootcamp labs 12) and it seems that I always run into a situation where my routers have the entire OSPF database but the routes do not get injected into the routing table. After a series of shutting interfaces and a couple of router reboots they will then appear Note: This is strictly OSPF, no redistribution Question: What is the process for extracting routes from the OSPF database and placing the routes in the routing table ? I have read through the Cisco design guide but still cant seem to pull it together Any help would be appreciated.. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] OSPF Practice Exam www.boson.com\tests\Advanced.htm Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21016t=21000 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IP OSPF database to IP Route table question [7:21000]
I think if you do clear ip ospf * that should empty the routing table repopulate it from the ospf database... routerkid wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I have been working with a number of differnt OSPF configurations (CCBootcamp labs 12) and it seems that I always run into a situation where my routers have the entire OSPF database but the routes do not get injected into the routing table. After a series of shutting interfaces and a couple of router reboots they will then appear Note: This is strictly OSPF, no redistribution Question: What is the process for extracting routes from the OSPF database and placing the routes in the routing table ? I have read through the Cisco design guide but still cant seem to pull it together Any help would be appreciated.. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=21037t=21000 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: entry in the ospf database but not in the route table ? Is [7:5067]
This is not a direct answer to your question, but you might be interested to read this. This paper describes one strange situation in which ospf routes don't get into the routing table: http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/104/10.html -Rob Fielding - Original Message - From: Padhu (LFG) To: Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 10:53 AM Subject: entry in the ospf database but not in the route table ? Is that p ossible ? I am trying to locate an email thread that was talking about having an entry in the ospf database but not in the route table ? Is that possible ? Cheers,Padhu **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=5067t=5067 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Route table anomaly
Ip routing is disabled on your router that's why you are getting this message. Thanks Thangavel HCL Technologies Ltd Chennai ---INDIA - Original Message - From: Frank Wells [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 12:20 AM Subject: Route table anomaly Hey guys, 'sh ip route' gets me this output on one of my routers: 7newyork#sh ip route Default gateway is not set Host Gateway Last UseTotal Uses Interface ICMP redirect cache is empty 7newyork# Has anyone seen this before? Why can't I see any of the routes in the route table? Cheers _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Route table anomaly
Hey guys, 'sh ip route' gets me this output on one of my routers: 7newyork#sh ip route Default gateway is not set Host Gateway Last UseTotal Uses Interface ICMP redirect cache is empty 7newyork# Has anyone seen this before? Why can't I see any of the routes in the route table? Cheers _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Route table anomaly
Forget about the previous post, I'm a knucklehead. I didn't have ip routing enabled. Kind of odd that all my static routes worked fine without it enabled though! _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route table
Here is explanation
Whenever there is a change in the policy, the BGP session has to be cleared
for the new policy to
take effect. Clearing a BGP session causes cache invalidation and results in
a tremendous impact on
the operation of networks.
Soft reconfiguration allows policies to be configured and activated without
clearing the BGP session.
Soft reconfiguration is recommended; it is done on a per-neighbor basis.
. When soft reconfiguration is used to generate inbound updates from a
neighbor, it is called
inbound soft reconfiguration.
. When soft reconfiguration is used to send a new set of updates to a
neighbor, it is called outbound
soft reconfiguration.
Performing inbound reconfiguration enables the new inbound policy to take
effect. Performing
outbound reconfiguration causes the newlocal outbound policy take effect
without resetting the BGP
session. As a new set of updates is sent during outbound policy
reconfiguration, a new inbound
policy of the neighbor can also take effect.
In order to generate new inbound updates without resetting the BGP session,
the local BGP speaker
should store all the received updates without modification, regardless of
whether it is accepted or
denied by the current inbound policy. This is memory intensive and should be
avoided. On the other
hand, outbound soft reconfiguration does not have any memory overhead. One
could trigger an
outbound reconfiguration in the other side of the BGP session to make the
new inbound policy take
effect.
To allowinbound reconfiguration, BGP should be configured to store all
received updates. Outbound
reconfiguration does not require preconfiguration.
You can configure the Cisco IOS software to start storing received updates,
which is required for
inbound BGP soft reconfiguration. Outbound reconfiguration does not require
inbound soft
reconfiguration to be enabled.
To configure BGP soft configuration, use the following command in router
configuration mode:
neighbor {ip-address | peer-group-name} soft-reconfiguration
Hope this answers your query
Thanks
Thangavel
- Original Message -
From: jason yee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: thangs [EMAIL PROTECTED]; ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED]; whatshakin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 12:43 PM
Subject: Re: route table
really I did not know about this , please elaborate
thanks
suaveguru
--- thangs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I feel that it is not advisable to use soft in as
an argument ,coz your
router might end up with a memory crunch..
Thanks
Thangavel
- Original Message -
From: jason yee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED]; whatshakin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 8:03 AM
Subject: Re: route table
alternatively you can try clear ip bgp neigh
addr
soft in /out to just update the bgp table and not
flush all of them
suaveguru
--- ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, whatshakin wrote:
clear ip bgp *
Don't do this on a production network during
business hours!
On a production network running BGP, business
hours
tend to be 7/24.
- Original Message -
From: Raymond Mak [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Would you tell me how to flush the bgp
routing
table to make it learn
again?
--
Bungee jumping and skydiving are for wimps. If
you
want to experience
true gut-wrenching terror, have children.
--Dusty
Rhoades.
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For
more
information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_
UPDATED Posting Guidelines:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations
to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's
FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
_
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
_
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route table
alternatively you can try clear ip bgp neigh addr soft in /out to just update the bgp table and not flush all of them suaveguru --- ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, whatshakin wrote: clear ip bgp * Don't do this on a production network during business hours! On a production network running BGP, business hours tend to be 7/24. - Original Message - From: Raymond Mak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn again? -- Bungee jumping and skydiving are for wimps. If you want to experience true gut-wrenching terror, have children. --Dusty Rhoades. **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route table
I feel that it is not advisable to use soft in as an argument ,coz your router might end up with a memory crunch.. Thanks Thangavel - Original Message - From: jason yee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED]; whatshakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 8:03 AM Subject: Re: route table alternatively you can try clear ip bgp neigh addr soft in /out to just update the bgp table and not flush all of them suaveguru --- ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, whatshakin wrote: clear ip bgp * Don't do this on a production network during business hours! On a production network running BGP, business hours tend to be 7/24. - Original Message - From: Raymond Mak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn again? -- Bungee jumping and skydiving are for wimps. If you want to experience true gut-wrenching terror, have children. --Dusty Rhoades. **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route table
really I did not know about this , please elaborate thanks suaveguru --- thangs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I feel that it is not advisable to use soft in as an argument ,coz your router might end up with a memory crunch.. Thanks Thangavel - Original Message - From: jason yee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED]; whatshakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2000 8:03 AM Subject: Re: route table alternatively you can try clear ip bgp neigh addr soft in /out to just update the bgp table and not flush all of them suaveguru --- ElephantChild [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 1 Oct 2000, whatshakin wrote: clear ip bgp * Don't do this on a production network during business hours! On a production network running BGP, business hours tend to be 7/24. - Original Message - From: Raymond Mak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn again? -- Bungee jumping and skydiving are for wimps. If you want to experience true gut-wrenching terror, have children. --Dusty Rhoades. **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE. http://im.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: route table
hi, I am wondering if I could use this clear ip bgp * if I encounter bgp flapping due to serial down for a while and then up again . This is because my bgp is fully functionally receiving all the routes only after a few hours after my serial went down and up again for 2 minutes Jason -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of whatshakin Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 2:08 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: route table clear ip bgp * Don't do this on a production network during business hours! - Original Message - From: Raymond Mak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2000 9:47 AM Subject: route table Hi, Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn again? Thanks Regards, Raymond **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: route table
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Yee, Jason wrote: I am wondering if I could use this clear ip bgp * if I encounter bgp flapping due to serial down for a while and then up again . This is because my bgp is fully functionally receiving all the routes only after a few hours after my serial went down and up again for 2 minutes Not a good idea. Every time you do it, the rest of the net sees a route flap from you. Too many flaps over a period of time, and others will "damp" your advertisements, ignoring them for what can be rather lengthy periods of time. If you see the session flapping due to serial line issues on one link, why would you want to clear the entire BGP routing table? This will just cause problems with your other sessions. If you're having line problems with one of your BGP peers that is causing the session to flap, it's a good idea to admin down the BGP session with that neighbor until the problem is fixed and the line is stable. In router config mode: (config-router)# neighbor www.xxx.yyy.zzz shutdown To restore once the line is fixed, (config-router)# no neighbor www.xxx.yyy.zzz shutdown This will allow your other BGP sessions to continue unaffected. Then call telco or whatever you need to do to isolate the serial line problem without causing route flap and trying to push customer data over a flaky line. Turn the session up once you've fixed the line problem. If the line is flaky enough so as not to keep a stable TCP 179 connection, it isn't going to be much good for much else, so shut it down and get it fixed. "clear ip bgp *" will flap all sessions on that router, making things quite unstable for a period, especially if you're a transit provider or have IBGP sessions going as well, as they'll flap and spike CPU on your other internal routers. If you're single homed over a single link, consider a static default instead of BGP. Your router and your upstream will be much happier. -- Jay Hennigan - Network Administration - [EMAIL PROTECTED] NetLojix Communications, Inc. NASDAQ: NETX - http://www.netlojix.com/ WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: route table
thank you very much for your explanation Jason -Original Message- From: Jay Hennigan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 3:16 PM To: Yee, Jason Cc: 'whatshakin'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: route table On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Yee, Jason wrote: I am wondering if I could use this clear ip bgp * if I encounter bgp flapping due to serial down for a while and then up again . This is because my bgp is fully functionally receiving all the routes only after a few hours after my serial went down and up again for 2 minutes Not a good idea. Every time you do it, the rest of the net sees a route flap from you. Too many flaps over a period of time, and others will "damp" your advertisements, ignoring them for what can be rather lengthy periods of time. If you see the session flapping due to serial line issues on one link, why would you want to clear the entire BGP routing table? This will just cause problems with your other sessions. If you're having line problems with one of your BGP peers that is causing the session to flap, it's a good idea to admin down the BGP session with that neighbor until the problem is fixed and the line is stable. In router config mode: (config-router)# neighbor www.xxx.yyy.zzz shutdown To restore once the line is fixed, (config-router)# no neighbor www.xxx.yyy.zzz shutdown This will allow your other BGP sessions to continue unaffected. Then call telco or whatever you need to do to isolate the serial line problem without causing route flap and trying to push customer data over a flaky line. Turn the session up once you've fixed the line problem. If the line is flaky enough so as not to keep a stable TCP 179 connection, it isn't going to be much good for much else, so shut it down and get it fixed. "clear ip bgp *" will flap all sessions on that router, making things quite unstable for a period, especially if you're a transit provider or have IBGP sessions going as well, as they'll flap and spike CPU on your other internal routers. If you're single homed over a single link, consider a static default instead of BGP. Your router and your upstream will be much happier. -- Jay Hennigan - Network Administration - [EMAIL PROTECTED] NetLojix Communications, Inc. NASDAQ: NETX - http://www.netlojix.com/ WestNet: Connecting you to the planet. 805 884-6323 **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
route table
Hi, Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn again? Thanks Regards, Raymond **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route table
clear ip bgp * Don't do this on a production network during business hours! - Original Message - From: Raymond Mak [EMAIL PROTECTED] Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2000 9:47 AM Subject: route table Hi, Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn again? Thanks Regards, Raymond **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] **NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html _ UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: route table
Don't do this on a production network unless you know what you're doing.
You have been warned.
To reset the session: clear ip bgp *
to just do an update: clear ip bgp * soft
to reset a single neighbor at a time: clear ip bgp {address}
to update a single neighbor at a time: clear ip bgp {address} soft
:Fuzz
On Mon, 2 Oct 2000, Raymond Mak wrote:
Hi,
Would you tell me how to flush the bgp routing table to make it learn
again?
Thanks
Regards,
Raymond
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
