Re: [c-nsp] vs anycast hsrp
All the anycast routers need to use the same switch ID for the same bundle. ie, it's a 'shared' SID. Tim At 12:34 PM 9/7/2013 Saturday, Arne Larsen / Region Nordjylland proclaimed: Hi All Can someone give me a hint what I might be doing wrong. I'm trying to get anycast hsrp running but It's complaining about the switch-id. sh hsrp anycast Anycast bundle - 1 (IPv4) Admin Status: Up Oper Status: Down Reason: Invalid switch-id Cfged, : Anycast Switch ID 166 Bundle priority 100 Bundle State Initial Tracking object ID 1 (Current status is Up) VLAN range: 2 neighbor sh hsrp anycast Anycast bundle - 1 (IPv4) Admin Status: Up Oper Status: Down Reason: Invalid switch-id Cfged, : Anycast Switch ID 165 Bundle priority 100 Bundle State Initial Tracking object ID 1 (Current status is Up) VLAN range: 2 /Arne ___ 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/ Tim Stevenson, tstev...@cisco.com Routing & Switching CCIE #5561 Distinguished Technical Marketing Engineer, Cisco Nexus 7000 Cisco - http://www.cisco.com IP Phone: 408-526-6759 The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential* and are intended for the specified recipients only. ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] GRE tunnel routes not making it into FIB - 2911/K9
Hi Tim, The fact that you are seeing the physical interface (gig0/0) is normal, as it is the recursive adjacency and ultimately the interface through which will exit the box. You can do a "show ip cef 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 int" if you want to see more details about the recursion. The issue is somewhere else. Regards Le 2013-09-07 14:17, « Tim Huffman » a écrit : >I have a customer with a strange problem that I can duplicate on a >similar set up. We are both using Cisco 2911 routers. His is running >version 15.1(4)M5 (base license), and mine is running 15.0(1)M6. > >What's happening is this: There is a GRE tunnel set up between his router >(a 2911) and mine (a 6503/sup720). We are running BGP over that GRE >tunnel. The tunnel is up, and the two routers can pass traffic through >the tunnel, but only to the router interfaces, NOT to devices on the >customer LAN. On the 6503 side, the routes are installed normally, and >CEF shows that traffic destined for his LAN should be going over the >tunnel. > >However, on the 2911 side, although the tunnel is up, and BGP is working, >traffic is not being encapsulated, and devices attached to his LAN cannot >get out to the Internet. When I do a 'sh ip route' things look fine. If I >do a 'sh ip cef' things look fine. But if I do a 'sh ip cef exact-route' >things get weird. > >Here's what I'm seeing on his router: > >#sh ip route >... >B*0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.254.20.25 > >#sh ip cef >Prefix Next Hop Interface >0.0.0.0/010.254.20.25 Tunnel5 > >Everything looks good. Here's where it gets weird: > >#sh ip cef exact-route 199.195.246.10 63.250.224.22 >199.195.246.10 -> 63.250.224.22 => IP adj out of GigabitEthernet0/0, addr >63.250.226.93 > >Even if I take out the BGP route, and try STATICALLY routing traffic over >the connection, I get similar results: >#sh ip route >... >S*0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.254.20.25 > >#sh ip cef exact-route 199.195.246.10 63.250.224.50 >199.195.246.10 -> 63.250.224.50 => IP adj out of GigabitEthernet0/0, addr >63.250.226.93 > >Is there something I'm missing? Could this be an IOS bug? Both 2911s are >running the 'base' license, is routing over simple GRE something that's >only enabled on some other license? > >-- >Tim Huffman > > >___ >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/ ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] vs anycast hsrp
Which platform? Lars Christensen CCIE #20292 Den 07/09/2013 kl. 21.34 skrev Arne Larsen / Region Nordjylland : > Hi All > > Can someone give me a hint what I might be doing wrong. > I'm trying to get anycast hsrp running but It's complaining about the > switch-id. > > > sh hsrp anycast > Anycast bundle - 1 (IPv4) > Admin Status: Up Oper Status: Down > Reason: Invalid switch-id Cfged, : > Anycast Switch ID 166 > Bundle priority 100 > Bundle State Initial > Tracking object ID 1 (Current status is Up) > VLAN range: 2 > > > neighbor > > sh hsrp anycast > Anycast bundle - 1 (IPv4) > Admin Status: Up Oper Status: Down > Reason: Invalid switch-id Cfged, : > Anycast Switch ID 165 > Bundle priority 100 > Bundle State Initial > Tracking object ID 1 (Current status is Up) > VLAN range: 2 > > /Arne > > ___ > 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/ ___ 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/
[c-nsp] vs anycast hsrp
Hi All Can someone give me a hint what I might be doing wrong. I'm trying to get anycast hsrp running but It's complaining about the switch-id. sh hsrp anycast Anycast bundle - 1 (IPv4) Admin Status: Up Oper Status: Down Reason: Invalid switch-id Cfged, : Anycast Switch ID 166 Bundle priority 100 Bundle State Initial Tracking object ID 1 (Current status is Up) VLAN range: 2 neighbor sh hsrp anycast Anycast bundle - 1 (IPv4) Admin Status: Up Oper Status: Down Reason: Invalid switch-id Cfged, : Anycast Switch ID 165 Bundle priority 100 Bundle State Initial Tracking object ID 1 (Current status is Up) VLAN range: 2 /Arne ___ 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/
[c-nsp] GRE tunnel routes not making it into FIB - 2911/K9
I have a customer with a strange problem that I can duplicate on a similar set up. We are both using Cisco 2911 routers. His is running version 15.1(4)M5 (base license), and mine is running 15.0(1)M6. What's happening is this: There is a GRE tunnel set up between his router (a 2911) and mine (a 6503/sup720). We are running BGP over that GRE tunnel. The tunnel is up, and the two routers can pass traffic through the tunnel, but only to the router interfaces, NOT to devices on the customer LAN. On the 6503 side, the routes are installed normally, and CEF shows that traffic destined for his LAN should be going over the tunnel. However, on the 2911 side, although the tunnel is up, and BGP is working, traffic is not being encapsulated, and devices attached to his LAN cannot get out to the Internet. When I do a 'sh ip route' things look fine. If I do a 'sh ip cef' things look fine. But if I do a 'sh ip cef exact-route' things get weird. Here's what I'm seeing on his router: #sh ip route ... B*0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.254.20.25 #sh ip cef Prefix Next Hop Interface 0.0.0.0/010.254.20.25 Tunnel5 Everything looks good. Here's where it gets weird: #sh ip cef exact-route 199.195.246.10 63.250.224.22 199.195.246.10 -> 63.250.224.22 => IP adj out of GigabitEthernet0/0, addr 63.250.226.93 Even if I take out the BGP route, and try STATICALLY routing traffic over the connection, I get similar results: #sh ip route ... S*0.0.0.0/0 [1/0] via 10.254.20.25 #sh ip cef exact-route 199.195.246.10 63.250.224.50 199.195.246.10 -> 63.250.224.50 => IP adj out of GigabitEthernet0/0, addr 63.250.226.93 Is there something I'm missing? Could this be an IOS bug? Both 2911s are running the 'base' license, is routing over simple GRE something that's only enabled on some other license? -- Tim Huffman ___ 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/
