Why tagged EIGRP routes arent propagated?

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by Frozer, Aug 4, 2005.

  1. Frozer

    Frozer Guest

    Hi!

    I have following scheme:
    Router1<->Switch_L3<->Router2<->Router3

    Router1 has two EIGRP AS - 100 and 1000
    Switch_L3 same
    Router2 same
    Router3 only EIGRP AS 1000

    Switch_L3 is a distrubution point for network with following:
    ---->
    router eigrp 1000
    redistribute eigrp 100 route-map to-eigrp1000
    ...
    !
    route-map to-eigrp1000 deny 10
    match tag 1000
    !
    route-map to-eigrp1000 permit 20
    set tag 100
    !
    <----

    - "sh ip eigrp 1000 topology" said (on Switch_L3):
    ....
    P 10.0.1.11/32, 1 successors, FD is 2447360, tag is 100
    via Redistributed (2447360/0)
    ....

    - Also "sh ip eigrp 1000 topology" said (on Router1 and Router2):
    ....
    P 10.0.1.11/32, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible, tag is 100
    via 10.99.15.254 (2449920/2447360), FastEthernet0/0
    ....

    But "sh ip eigrp 1000 topology" on Router3 return only untagged routes.
    I cant find any information on cisco.com about any similar situation,
    so I wrote here. Any ideas?
     
    Frozer, Aug 4, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Frozer

    Merv Guest

    Start by determining why "FD is Inaccessible" is showing for the EIGRP
    topology entry for route 10.0.1.11


    To see more detail for the topo entry, display and post the output of
    sh ip eigrp topo 10.0.1.11 255.255.255.255
     
    Merv, Aug 5, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Frozer

    Frozer Guest

    Yes, this is a unsinchronized entry after "clear ip eigrp 100
    neighbors" command, there is no more "FD is Inaccessible" entries
    after some hours.

    But question is still here: Router_3 cant get the whole routing table
    from Router_2. Also, I made another connection from Router_1 to
    Router_3, but situation is similar.
     
    Frozer, Aug 8, 2005
    #3
  4. Frozer

    Tinu Guest

    Hi,

    I once had problems with redistribution between EIGRP processes which
    were solved by assigning one of this processes a different default
    distance.

    Maybe this helps in your case too...

    Router(config)# router eigrp xxx
    Router(router-config)# distance eigrp 91 171

    Good luck,
    Martin

    Frozer wrote:
    > Hi!
    >
    > I have following scheme:
    > Router1<->Switch_L3<->Router2<->Router3
    >
    > Router1 has two EIGRP AS - 100 and 1000
    > Switch_L3 same
    > Router2 same
    > Router3 only EIGRP AS 1000
    >
    > Switch_L3 is a distrubution point for network with following:
    > ---->
    > router eigrp 1000
    > redistribute eigrp 100 route-map to-eigrp1000
    > ...
    > !
    > route-map to-eigrp1000 deny 10
    > match tag 1000
    > !
    > route-map to-eigrp1000 permit 20
    > set tag 100
    > !
    > <----
    >
    > - "sh ip eigrp 1000 topology" said (on Switch_L3):
    > ...
    > P 10.0.1.11/32, 1 successors, FD is 2447360, tag is 100
    > via Redistributed (2447360/0)
    > ...
    >
    > - Also "sh ip eigrp 1000 topology" said (on Router1 and Router2):
    > ...
    > P 10.0.1.11/32, 0 successors, FD is Inaccessible, tag is 100
    > via 10.99.15.254 (2449920/2447360), FastEthernet0/0
    > ...
    >
    > But "sh ip eigrp 1000 topology" on Router3 return only untagged routes.
    > I cant find any information on cisco.com about any similar situation,
    > so I wrote here. Any ideas?
     
    Tinu, Aug 8, 2005
    #4
  5. Frozer

    Frozer Guest

    Thanks, Martin - your idea about distances, I re-read documentation
    about EIGRP and found similar situation, it describes intersection
    between two or more routes with different AS, but pointed to same
    location.
    Look, Router_2 has two AS 1000 and 100, so it has routes in routing
    table for outside (AS100) networks. Also it get same routes from
    AS1000, which pointed to Switch_L3, BUT It can transmit routing table
    to Router_3 _without_ its own routes (it;s right). So I made
    redistribution from AS100 on Router_2 to AS 1000 via "route-map" and
    Router_3 got right routes. Everything work fine.

    Best Regards, Den.
     
    Frozer, Aug 9, 2005
    #5
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Robertas
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    421
  2. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    28,689
    James Harris
    Dec 27, 2005
  3. BG
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    7,015
  4. jv
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    322
  5. lfnetworking

    vtp cfg change not getting propagated

    lfnetworking, Jun 14, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    3,805
    lfnetworking
    Jun 14, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page