And your problem is, you get multiple default routes?
route-map FOO permit 100
match extcommunity 100
match ip address prefix-list DEFAULT
route-map FOO deny 200
match ip address prefix-list DEFAULT
route-map FOO permit 300
in your VRF_SHARED_SERVICE, so that you only import DEFAULT
Sort off, I need the default route from the vrf with the import target
64515:112, that's our leak for the shared vrf to the internet
/Arne
On 08/06/2024 17.31, Saku Ytti wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 at 18:26, Arne Larsen via cisco-nsp
wrote:
Yes, it'd with route-target I'm trying to get it
On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 at 18:26, Arne Larsen via cisco-nsp
wrote:
> Yes, it'd with route-target I'm trying to get it to work, and what I'm
> trying to get rid off is the default route from the IOT vrf to be
> imported into the SHARED vrf.
Ok so the problem is not sharing routes between VRF, problem
Sorry James and all others
I hope this will clarify a bit more.
Yes, it'd with route-target I'm trying to get it to work, and what I'm
trying to get rid off is the default route from the IOT vrf to be
imported into the SHARED vrf.
Here are the vrf definition.:
vrf definition
Hi all
I’m struggling with an 9606 Cisco router and route leaking between vrf’s.
I have 2 vrf’s with a default route that needs to imported into a 3.
The default route from the one vrf’s is direct connected on the box,
andthe other is via mBGP.
I’ve tried several forms for import maps base
Hi all.
Can someone give me a hint about route leaking.
I would like to leak a vrf network into the global routing table.
I'm using a 6500-vss environment. The vrf network is a vlan directly on the vss.
When I try to leak it into the global routing I get an error that next hop is
the router it
You can insert statics to an L3 interface with a next-hop of a second
router (very kludgy and inefficient, but required for the reason you
discovered).
You can use a FWSM or external box to handle the route [leak].
You can loop a cable between global and the target VRF.
You can do VRF Selection
