loopback route it received as hidden/unusable but the
IPv6 loopback route is not.
Jonathan
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
To: lordsit...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 20:38:18 +0200
Your pasting
: 1 Forwarding nexthops: 1
Nexthop: fe80:db8:4000:1::3 via ge-0/0/8.0
Jonathan Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
To: lordsit...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 07:45:00 +0200
On 14/Apr
On 15/Apr/15 16:24, Jonathan Call wrote:
Here is the output of 'show route extensive'. Hopefully it shows up
formatted properly this time.
It copied okay for me this time (maybe because it's HTML e-mail, not sure).
However...
router1 ...oute 2001:db8:4000::1 extensive
I thought the
Nexthop: fe80:db8:4000:1::3 via ge-0/0/8.0
Jonathan Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
To: lordsit...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 07:45:00 +0200
On 14/Apr/15 19:37, Jonathan Call wrote:
Why does the router
: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 23:47:04 +0900
From: cont...@winterei.se
To: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
Perhaps use a pastebin?
On 4/15/2015 午後 11:24, Jonathan Call wrote:
Here is the output of 'show route extensive'. Hopefully it shows up
formatted properly
other route) via IBGP to router2, router2 shouldn't be re-advertising it back
to router1 via IBGP. At least in the case of the IPv4 address it gets marked as
hidden/unusable by router1.
Jonathan
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
To: lordsit...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
From
On 15/Apr/15 17:43, Jonathan Call wrote:
Correct. The BGP route for the router's IPv4 loopback is marked as
hidden/unusable. It does not show up in show route extensive output.
Is this Loopback IPv4 address known by any other routing protocol, e.g.,
an IGP?
Mark.
routes would prevent this. It still does not
explain why router1 will mark the IPv4 loopback route it received as
hidden/unusable but the IPv6 loopback route is not. Jonathan Subject:
Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6 To: lordsit...@hotmail.com;
juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
as hidden/unusable but the IPv6 loopback route is not.
Jonathan
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
To: lordsit...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 18:02:30 +0200
On 15/Apr/15 17:43, Jonathan Call
wrote
router1 will mark
the IPv4 loopback route it received as hidden/unusable but the
IPv6 loopback route is not.
Jonathan
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
To: lordsit...@hotmail.com; juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
From: mark.ti...@seacom.mu
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 20:38:18 +0200
export directly connected routes would
prevent this scenario from happening at all but it does not explain
why router1 will mark
the IPv4 loopback route it received as hidden/unusable but the
IPv6 loopback route is not.
Jonathan
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] iBGP and IPv6
So I have a lab with two routers exchanging iBGP between them. They have both
IPv4 and IPv6 addresses configured on the loopback. There aren't any export or
import policies defined between the two. When I examine the routes for the
local loopback interface on router1 I see the following:
On 14/Apr/15 19:37, Jonathan Call wrote:
Why does the router flag the BGP route for the IPv4 loopback as Unusable but
doesn't do the same for the IPv6 loopback address? Does it even matter?
Can you show extensive for the route?
Also, try formatting your paste better - I can't quite make it
13 matches
Mail list logo
