Learn how to a build a cloud-first strategyRegister Now

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 658
  • Last Modified:

Cisco Mutual redistribution between EIGRP and BGP and match statements

Hello Experts

I'm working on a mutual redistribution problem between EIGRP and BGP

The idea is set a tag (210) to traffic coming from our LAN on R2-2 so that it can be matched and denied on R3-7. The goal is to prevent routing loops.

The routes are being redistributed into R1-1, but I'm not able to see if the routes are being tagged.

Can someone let me know how to verify routes are being filtered with the route-maps?

TBH, I don't think its working at all.

I have attached the configs and show commands.

I read somewhere the problem was with command match route-type internal, but I'm not sure if that is the problem

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Cheers
R1-1.txt
R2-2.txt
R3-7.txt
R4-3.txt
R5-8.txt
JMROUTETAGGING.png
0
Member_2_7966113
Asked:
Member_2_7966113
  • 4
  • 4
1 Solution
 
PredragNetwork EngineerCommented:
Once again (I wrote the same for OSPF redistribution).
You can't tag routes while you redistribute routes into BGP (at least not with route map set tag <number>).

You can check route tag typically by using
# sh ip route x.x.x.x    <--- specific route that you need to check (easy on router on what you are not doing redistribution)
# sh ip eigrp topology  <--- for routes imported into EIGRP
# sh ip ospf database   <--- for routes imported into OSPF
0
 
PredragNetwork EngineerCommented:
You can find article about BGP autotagging here.
I remembered that scenario when I saw message
% "TAG" used as redistribute ospf into bgp route-map, set tag not supported
Did not go deep in configurations from your links currently, but as much as I can see it is the same what I already wrote you for ospf to bgp mutual redistribution. There is no tagging OSFP while redistributing in BGP (but did not go too deep into configs 2- 4, I just checked the first one).
One of your possible solutions is to change AD of BGP to look worse than EIGRP or OSPF (on edge routers) so as long as internal routes exist internal routes with lower AD will be placed in routing table of edge routers. Changing AD for routing protocols is locally significant, so it will not affect any other routers.
But scenario should be real life, otherwise I am not sure which loop prevention mechanism to apply since there is more than one option for those scenarios.
0
Get Cisco Certified in IT Security

There’s a high demand for IT security experts and network administrators who can safeguard the data that individuals, corporations, and governments rely on every day. Pursue your B.S. in Network Operations and Security and gain the credentials you need for this high-growth field.

 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
Hi Predrag,

Thanks again for responding. You have been very helpful.

Because I was certain it worked I also posted the question on Cisco website. This is what they have to say:

https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/13110191/mutual-redistribution-between-eigrp-and-bgp-and-match-statements#comment-11579926
0
 
PredragNetwork EngineerCommented:
However, how can I verify traffic that routing loops will be prevented? Basically, I shouldn't be able to see network 192.168.1.1 in R5-8 and I shouldn't be able to see 192.168.2.2 in R3-3
Non edge router will always prefer non external routes in the case of OSPF or EGRP. OSPF when redistribute from other protocols marks routes as E1 or E2 type. EIGRP for external routes have AD 170 internal AD 90. However for edge routers, by default, BGP routes are more attractive (better AD), so changing administrative distance for BGP on edge routers from 20 to 180 can also solve some potential problems, or create some new :) (redundant routes received over BGP will not be placed in routing table of edge routers), but again, it all depends on full scenario what you want to achieve.
Also
I read somewhere the problem was with command match route-type internal, but I'm not sure if that is the problem
In your scenario match route-type internal is equal to tagging of routes while redistributing to OSPF and filtering on redistribution to BGP).
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
Hi Predrag,

Thanks again for your input.

I'm not sure what your conclusion is?
0
 
PredragNetwork EngineerCommented:
No conclusion, just suggestions to what you should pay attention too.
Redistribution and loop prevention can be done in several ways and the best way (easiest way) may be protocol or scenario specific.
0
 
Member_2_7966113Author Commented:
Hi Predrag, if think we have both come to the same conclusion. In any case your answers pointed me in the right direction
0

Featured Post

Get your Disaster Recovery as a Service basics

Disaster Recovery as a Service is one go-to solution that revolutionizes DR planning. Implementing DRaaS could be an efficient process, easily accessible to non-DR experts. Learn about monitoring, testing, executing failovers and failbacks to ensure a "healthy" DR environment.

  • 4
  • 4
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now