eigrp set next hop

David Swafford david at davidswafford.com
Wed Apr 20 04:58:59 CDT 2011


If the number of prefixes are small, and your on Cisco gear, take a look at
IP SLA as an option for manipulating static routes.  Basically it'll allow
you to setup a probe, and based on the result of the probe, dynamically
populate a given static route in the routing table or not.

David.



On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:57 PM, Andrey Khomyakov <
khomyakov.andrey at gmail.com> wrote:

> The goal is to withdraw the prefixes should any part of the connection go
> down.
> Unfortunately  router1--router2--firewall is part of a production setup and
> not easily changed. The idea is really to have something like this (ideally
> without router2):
>
> router1-router2-firewall-router3
>    |                             |
>   router4-firewall-router5
>
> I just wanted to check if I'm missing some knowledge about redistributing
> BGP into EIGRP. It appears that there is really no way to manipulate
> next-hop value. (no ip next-hop-self eigrp 1 is not really an option
> because
> there are many more prefixes coming from other routers that are being
> redistributed to router2 from router1)
>
> I will see if the network will allow BGP on router2. That seems to be the
> only clean solution for this.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 9:25 PM, David Swafford <david at davidswafford.com
> >wrote:
>
> > What's the real goal behind this?  What your describing sounds like a
> > horrible band-aid....
> >
> > David.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 5:08 PM, Andrey Khomyakov <
> > khomyakov.andrey at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi nanog
> >>
> >> I need to advertise EIGRP route with a different next-hop value than
> self
> >>
> >> Due to how the connections are setup, I have to run BGP between two
> peers
> >> that are 3 hops away from each other.
> >>
> >> router1--router2--firewall--router3
> >> I'm running EBGP between router1 and router3
> >> router1 is redistributing into EIGRP that's running with router2
> >>
> >> The problem is that now router2 thinks that router3 routes are reachable
> >> via
> >> router1 so I have myself a route loop.
> >>
> >> Is there a way to advertise an EIGRP route with next hop of router3 (or
> >> firewall for that matter) rather than router1 which is what EIGRP does
> by
> >> default
> >>
> >> Thank you in advance for advice.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Andrey Khomyakov
> >> [khomyakov.andrey at gmail.com]
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Andrey Khomyakov
> [khomyakov.andrey at gmail.com]
>



More information about the NANOG mailing list