From: Bit Gossip (bit.gossip@chello.nl)
Date: Sun Sep 09 2007 - 04:41:23 ART
Now maybe I understand why certain redistribution I have done using tag
and filter were going belly up :-)
Anyway I think there is a workaround
router rip
redistribute ospf 1 route-map WORKAROUND
route-map WORKAROUND
match tag 1
set tag 1
Funny enough but this way the tag is carried over to RIP
Bit.
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 22:59 +0100, Antonio Soares wrote:
> Got the same behaviour:
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> R2#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> Routing entry for 1.1.1.0/24
>   Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20
>   Tag 1, type extern 2, forward metric 10
>   Redistributing via rip
>   Advertised by rip metric 2
>   Last update from 12.12.12.1 on Ethernet1/0, 00:02:04 ago
>   Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>   * 12.12.12.1, from 1.1.1.1, 00:02:04 ago, via Ethernet1/0
>       Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
> 
> R2#
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> R2#
> *Mar  4 21:47:59.818: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Ethernet1/1
> (23.23.23.2)
> *Mar  4 21:47:59.818: RIP: build update entries
> *Mar  4 21:47:59.818:   1.1.1.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 2, tag 0
> *Mar  4 21:47:59.818:   2.2.2.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 2, tag 0
> *Mar  4 21:47:59.818:   12.12.12.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 2, tag 0
> R2#
> ++++++++++++++++++++++
> R3#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> Routing entry for 1.1.1.0/24
>   Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 2
>   Redistributing via rip
>   Last update from 23.23.23.2 on Ethernet0/1, 00:00:18 ago
>   Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>   * 23.23.23.2, from 23.23.23.2, 00:00:18 ago, via Ethernet0/1
>       Route metric is 2, traffic share count is 1
> 
> R3#
> ++++++++++++++++++++++ 
> 
> And as you saw, eigrp maintains the tag:
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++ 
> R3#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> Routing entry for 1.1.1.0/24
>   Known via "eigrp 23", distance 170, metric 2560025856
>   Tag 1, type external
>   Redistributing via eigrp 23
>   Last update from 23.23.23.2 on Ethernet0/1, 00:00:03 ago
>   Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>   * 23.23.23.2, from 23.23.23.2, 00:00:03 ago, via Ethernet0/1
>       Route metric is 2560025856, traffic share count is 1
>       Total delay is 1010 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 1 Kbit
>       Reliability 1/255, minimum MTU 1 bytes
>       Loading 1/255, Hops 1
> 
> R3#
> ++++++++++++++++++++++ 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Antonio Soares
> CCIE #18473, CCNP, CCIP
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bit Gossip [mailto:bit.gossip@chello.nl] 
> Sent: sexta-feira, 7 de Setembro de 2007 21:52
> To: Antonio Soares; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: is IGP tag transitive
> 
> I have done further more tests on
> C3750 Software (C3750-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.2(25)SEE
> and
> (C2600-JK9S-M), Version 12.3(21)
> and
> 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.4(15)T1
> and
> C2600 Software (C2600-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.4(12)
> 
> When redistributing from OSPF into RIP the tag is lost and reset to 0 !!!
> 
> The simple test:
> 
> R2(config-router)#do show run | b router
> router eigrp 100
>  redistribute ospf 1 metric 1 1 1 1 1
>  network 2.2.2.2 0.0.0.0
>  no auto-summary
> router ospf 1
>  log-adjacency-changes
>  network 1.1.1.2 0.0.0.0 area 0
> router rip
>  version 2
>  redistribute ospf 1 metric 1
>  network 2.0.0.0
> 
> R2(config-router)#do show ip route 9.9.9.9
> Routing entry for 9.9.9.9/32
>   Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20
>   Tag 9, type extern 2, forward metric 64
>   Redistributing via eigrp 100, rip
>   Advertised by eigrp 100 metric 1 1 1 1 1
>                 rip metric 1
>   Last update from 1.1.1.1 on Serial1/1, 00:03:57 ago
>   Routing Descriptor Blocks:
>   * 1.1.1.1, from 9.9.9.9, 00:03:57 ago, via Serial1/1
>       Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
>       Route tag 9
> 
> R2(config-router)#
> *Sep  7 22:48:30.963: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Serial1/0 
> (2.2.2.2)
> *Sep  7 22:48:30.963: RIP: build update entries
> *Sep  7 22:48:30.963:   1.0.0.0/8 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> *Sep  7 22:48:30.963:   9.0.0.0/8 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> 
> 
> Instead the same redistribution OSPF->EIGRP no problem.
> This can have quite an impact when relying on tagging in mutual 
> redistribution scenarios
> 
> Please confirm, or better tell me that I am wrong !!!
> 
> Thanks,
> bit.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bit Gossip" <bit.gossip@chello.nl>
> To: "Antonio Soares" <amsoares@netcabo.pt>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: is IGP tag transitive
> 
> 
> >I am afraid there is a major problem with tag here:
> >
> >
> > interface Loopback1
> > ip address 9.9.9.9 255.255.255.255
> > !
> > interface Serial1/0
> > ip address 1.1.1.1 255.0.0.0
> > serial restart-delay 0
> > !
> > router rip
> > version 2
> > redistribute connected route-map R
> > network 1.0.0.0
> > !
> > route-map R permit 10
> > set tag 9
> > !
> > R1(config-router)#
> > *Sep  7 21:48:42.227: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via Serial1/0 
> > (1.1.1.1)
> > *Sep  7 21:48:42.227: RIP: build update entries
> > *Sep  7 21:48:42.227:   9.0.0.0/8 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Antonio Soares" <amsoares@netcabo.pt>
> > To: "'Julio Carrasco'" <julio.carrasco@ya.com>; "'Bit Gossip'" 
> > <bit.gossip@chello.nl>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 7:57 PM
> > Subject: RE: is IGP tag transitive
> >
> >
> >> It does support. Maybe you are hitting an IOS issue. Here my routers are
> >> running 12.3.20:
> >>
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> R2#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> >> Routing entry for 1.1.1.1/32
> >>  Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 11, type intra area
> >>  Redistributing via rip
> >>  Advertised by rip metric 2 route-map ospf2rip
> >>  Last update from 12.12.12.1 on Ethernet1/0, 00:01:56 ago
> >>  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> >>  * 12.12.12.1, from 1.1.1.1, 00:01:56 ago, via Ethernet1/0
> >>      Route metric is 11, traffic share count is 1
> >>
> >> R2#
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> R2#sh route-map
> >> route-map ospf2rip, permit, sequence 10
> >>  Match clauses:
> >>  Set clauses:
> >>    tag 2
> >>  Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes
> >> R2#
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >> R3#sh ip route 1.1.1.1
> >> Routing entry for 1.1.1.1/32
> >>  Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 2
> >>  Tag 2
> >>  Redistributing via rip
> >>  Last update from 23.23.23.2 on Ethernet0/1, 00:00:06 ago
> >>  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> >>  * 23.23.23.2, from 23.23.23.2, 00:00:06 ago, via Ethernet0/1
> >>      Route metric is 2, traffic share count is 1
> >>
> >> R3#
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Antonio Soares
> >> CCIE #18473, CCNP, CCIP
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> >> Julio Carrasco
> >> Sent: sexta-feira, 7 de Setembro de 2007 18:36
> >> To: Bit Gossip; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >> Subject: Re: is IGP tag transitive
> >>
> >> Hi Bit,
> >>
> >> RIP do not support tags.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Bit Gossip" <bit.gossip@chello.nl>
> >> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 6:39 PM
> >> Subject: is IGP tag transitive
> >>
> >>
> >>> Experts,
> >>> I was under the impression that if routing protocol A set a tag value on
> 
> >>> a
> >>> certain prefix, when this prefix is redistributed into protocol B the 
> >>> tag
> >>> value is preserved.
> >>> My lab is showing instead that this is not true at least from OSPF to 
> >>> RIP.
> >>> What is the real truth here?
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> bit.
> >>>
> >>> Routing entry for 204.12.3.0/24
> >>>  Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 20
> >>>  Tag 125, type extern 2, forward metric 128
> >>>  Redistributing via rip
> >>>  Advertised by rip metric 1 route-map OR
> >>>  Last update from 145.3.23.2 on Serial4/0.23, 00:08:00 ago
> >>>  Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> >>>  * 145.3.23.2, from 150.3.5.5, 00:08:00 ago, via Serial4/0.23
> >>>      Route metric is 20, traffic share count is 1
> >>>      Route tag 125 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *Sep  7 16:44:46.833: RIP: sending v2 update to 224.0.0.9 via
> >>> FastEthernet1/0
> >>> (145.3.36.3)
> >>> *Sep  7 16:44:46.833: RIP: build update entries
> >>> <....>
> >>>
> >>> *Sep  7 16:44:46.837:   204.12.3.0/24 via 0.0.0.0, metric 1, tag 0
> >>> <<<<<<<<<
> >>>
> >>> Rack3R3#
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________________________________
> >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at: 
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:10 ART