![]() ![]() Please note only one physical connection - ge-1/0/4 - on the AE is currently connected. However, I can ping and ssh across the link, and OSPF and IBGP neighbor relationships are forming as expected, so I do think that is working.ĮDIT: I enabled LACP but to no avail. I don't have LACP enabled and I'll do so. MX-2: 2> show interfaces terse | match ae1 MX-1: > show interfaces terse | match ae1 There are physical interfaces on the aggregated interface. ![]() Is this because it is passing over an IP address on a private IP space? Any help is appreciated. The only difference I see is that Router 1 shows the route as being the BGP peer's IP and Router 2's being the IP of the interface it shares with R1. NOTE: on the "show route" command from Router 1, I changed the peer's IP address. All the routers are configured with loopback addresses. The R1 and R2 routers communicate with each other using MP-EBGP. The R2 router is configured to be in AS 6500. Round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 16.710/16.715/16.721/0.004 ms In this example, the R1 and R3 routers are configured to be in AS 5500 forming iBGP. # show policy-options policy-statement send-direct # show policy-options policy-statement ibgp-nhs Here is what I have configured and what I am seeing: I have configured IBGP between the two, and the second router is getting BGP routes, but I can't send traffic (such as pings) to valid IP addresses from it. One currently has a single internet connection on which it receives the full BGP routing table, and the other has no connection up at the moment.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |