whoops, I meant ip default-network
"He not busy being born is busy dying" -- Dylan
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) - WinPT 1.2.0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=8HMA
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan West" <rwest_at_zyedge.com>
To: "Gavin Schokman" <g_schokman_at_yahoo.com.au>, ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 7:43:32 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: RE: default-information originate route-map
Gavin / Dale,
Neither ACL / ip default-network / nor prefix-list (during the first test) re-inserted the route after it's manually removed from the table and then re-inserted. A clear ip route or modification to the route-map will cause it to be re-read and then route is re-inserted. The combination of ACL and ip default-network seem to provide the most consistent results and that only lasted for a little while. After removing and re-adding about 5 times, the only way I could it to read the route-map again was to get into route-map sub configuration:
I tried to give it enough time to for any flush or hold down timers, but that doesn't seem to matter.
23:30:20.457: -> re-added static route
23:34:32.325: -> waited over 4 mins and then entered the route-map configuration mode:
Rack1R1(config-route-map)#route-map ADV_DEFAULT
Rack1R1(config-route-map)#
*Apr 18 23:34:32.325: RIP-DB: adding 0.0.0.0/0 (metric 1) via 0.0.0.0 on Null0 to RIP database
*Apr 18 23:34:32.325: RIP-DB: add 0.0.0.0/0 (metric 1) via 0.0.0.0 on Null0 (donot_age)
*Apr 18 23:34:32.325: RIP-DB: Adding new rndb entry 0.0.0.0/0
*Apr 18 23:34:32.325: RIP-DB: Created rip ndb summary entry for 0.0.0.0/0
*Apr 18 23:34:32.325: RIP-DB: Adding new rndb entry 0.0.0.0/0
Seems a little flaky :)
-ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Gavin Schokman [mailto:g_schokman_at_yahoo.com.au]
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 7:07 PM
To: Ryan West; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: default-information originate route-map
Can you do me a favour and remove the static route and then re-insert it?
I'm not 100% confident it's not a bug.
I'm using 3600 Software (C3640-JK9O3S-M), Version 12.4(10c)
Cheers,
Gavin
-----Original Message-----
From: Ryan West [mailto:rwest_at_zyedge.com]
Sent: 18 April 2009 23:59
To: Gavin Schokman; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: default-information originate route-map
Gavin,
I just labbed it up:
*Apr 18 23:01:25.669: RIP: received v2 update from 173.1.13.1 on Serial1/2
*Apr 18 23:01:25.669: 0.0.0.0/0 via 0.0.0.0 in 1 hops
router rip
version 2
network 173.1.0.0
default-information originate route-map ADV_DEFAULT no auto-summary ip
route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Null0 ip prefix-list DEFAULT seq 5 permit 0.0.0.0/0
route-map ADV_DEFAULT permit 10 match ip address prefix-list DEFAULT
I will tell you that I have had problems with defaults being originated
while using RIP. I recently configured a lab with a Boolean OR with
multiple interfaces matched. My track list was UP, but the route would not
cooperate until both were up.
What version of code are you on?
-ryan
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Gavin Schokman
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 6:34 PM
To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: default-information originate route-map
Evening brain-bank,
I'm working through some IEWB lab stuff and come across an unexpected
behaviour (unexpected to me at least).
I'm trying to conditionally originate a default route via RIP. The condition
I'm using is "does 0.0.0.0/0 appear in local route table?".
If yes -> originate default, if not -> don't originate
The problem is that when I use 0.0.0.0/0 in the condition, it doesn't work.
If I use another (random) route as the condition, it works.
See config below:
condition_route = 0.0.0.0/0 => doesn't work
router rip
version 2
default-information originate route-map DEFAULT_MONITOR no auto-summary
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Null0
ip prefix-list DEFAULT seq 5 permit 0.0.0.0/0
route-map DEFAULT_MONITOR permit 10
match ip address prefix-list DEFAULT
! static route exists on Rack1R6
Rack1R6#sh ip route 0.0.0.0
Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet
Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0 (connected), candidate default
path
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* directly connected, via Null0
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
! default is not originated and pushed via RIP to Rack1R4
Rack1R4#sh ip route 0.0.0.0
% Network not in table
condition_route = 1.1.1.1/32 => doesn't work
router rip
version 2
default-information originate route-map ROUTE_WATCH no auto-summary
ip route 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255 Null0
ip prefix-list ROUTE_WATCH seq 5 permit 1.1.1.1/32
route-map ROUTE_WATCH permit 10
match ip address prefix-list ROUTE_WATCH
! static route exists on Rack1R6
Rack1R6#sh ip route 0.0.0.0
Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet
Known via "static", distance 1, metric 0 (connected), candidate default
path
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* directly connected, via Null0
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
! default IS originated and pushed via RIP to Rack1R4
Rack1R4#sh ip route 0.0.0.0
Routing entry for 0.0.0.0/0, supernet
Known via "rip", distance 120, metric 1, candidate default path
Redistributing via rip
Last update from 155.1.146.6 on Ethernet0/1, 00:00:03 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 155.1.146.6, from 155.1.146.6, 00:00:03 ago, via Ethernet0/1
Route metric is 1, traffic share count is 1
Seems to be something strange with 0.0.0.0/0. I know it is matching, see
below
Rack1R6#sh ip prefix-list detail
ip prefix-list DEFAULT:
count: 1, range entries: 0, sequences: 5 - 5, refcount: 2
seq 5 permit 0.0.0.0/0 (hit count: 20, refcount: 1)
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Gavin
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sat Apr 18 2009 - 23:55:06 ART
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon May 04 2009 - 07:39:12 ART