ISR router EIGRP Route Tag

Hi,
Wondering any one has successfully set route tag for EIGRP routes?
What I am trying to achieve here is to set route tag for the summary routes of the connected interfaces and subnets of some other connected interfaces.
Let's say an ISR router R1 with IOS 15.1(4)M3 has three interfaces running with EIGRP.
Interface Gi0/0
ip add 172.16.0.1/24
summary-add 172.16.0.0/16
Interface Gi0/1
ip add 172.16.1.1/24
summary-add 172.16.0.0/16
Interface Gi0/2
ip add 192.168.2.1/24
I am having difficulty to set route tag for summary add 172.16.0.0/16 and 192.168.2.0/24 before they get advertised to another router.
Any idea please?
Thanks
Cedar

Duplicate posts.
Go here: https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/12256521/isr-router-eigrp-route-tag

Similar Messages

Redistributing Routes based on TAGS

Hi,
I have a bunch of static routes I am RD'ing into OSPF and marking with a tag of 123
I want to then RD these routes ( only routes marked with tag 123) into EIGRP.
Can I achieve this with a route-map and a command in my EIGRP statement?
I'll start with
route-map RD-123 permit 10
match tag 123
Do I then need to deny everything else with another sequence number?
Can I achieve what I am trying to do above?
Thanks

Hi,
yes, you can do that.
If you redistribute your static routes to OSFP tagging with 123 on one router, you can then configure on another router:
router eigrp x
redistribute ospf y route-map RD-123
uisng your route-map suggested in your original post. You deon't need any deny entry in the route-map.
You can even use
redistribute ospf y match external 2 route-map RD-123
to be safer.
Best regards,
Milan

Eigrp routes doesn't refresh when neighbor down

hi guys, need some tips for troubleshooting an ongoing issue, but can't do the changes anymore untill next call and yes the issue is still ongoing.
                       WAN1 <--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------> WAN2
                           |                                                                             |
                   metro ethernet ME-3600X-A <----> ME-3600X-B <-----> ME-3600X-C<----> c3560v2
I have 3 metro ethernet switches and a c3560v2 switch connected as above. The WAN1 redistributes all routes to ME-3600X-A's eigrp and WAN2 redistributes all routes to c3560v2 's eigrp and these two propagates all their eigrp routes to ME-3600X-B and ME-3600X-C which are in the same eigrp AS. And all link/connections are point-to-point.
Now, when the link between ME-3600X-B <----> ME-3600X-C is physically disconnected, the ME-3600X-C's eigrp still points the route(s) to the ME-3600X-B's p2p ip as its next-hop - which is down(neighborship between them goes down, but still the routes doesn't refresh/rebuild). However, switch c3560v2 has route to the same network learnt from WAN2.
Wonder why, need inputs please? Thanks.

You shouldn't reference the CrystalReportViewer in the Page_Load handler, since there's issues with serialization of the report source:
http://devlibrary.businessobjects.com/BusinessObjectsXIR2SP2/
en/en/CrystalReports_dotNET_SDK/crsdk_net_doc/doc/
crsdk_net_doc/html/
crconsdkfundamentalspersistencepageloadeventhandler.htm
In fact, you should save the report source in session, and bind it to the viewer on post-back. Sample code can be found here:
http://resources.businessobjects.com/support/communitycs/
FilesAndUpdates/sample_applications_for_.NET_developers.pdf
Sincerely,
Ted Ueda

EIGRP Routing across MPLS Cloud

I appologize if this has been covered but I dont see any exact hits...
We are working with our Service Provider to implement MPLS between our remote sites and main campus. We are currently using PtoP T1 in a hub and spoke model. We are running EIGRP in our entire environment.
We would like to continue to run EIGRP in our environment but the SP does not support this protocol through the cloud. I would prefer not to introduce any new routing protocols into our environment such as BGP. (I believe SP is running BGP).
I have read snippits that I can us e GRE tunnel between sites and send EIGRP routing updates via this tunnel.
Can anyone support this method or are there better alternatives? If I implement GRE, I will still need to configure static routes so GRE knows how to reach the remote sites. I also cannot find any literature on how to configure GRE tunnels and use them ONLY for routing updates. I would think sending all traffic via GRE would cause additional overhead.
I will also have a need to send Multicast traffic between sites. I have read that GRE is the way to do this. To me it seems GRE will serve dual purposes.. first to allowing Dynamic routing updates between sites and also to allow Multicast traffic.
I appreciate any comments or suggestions!

Hello Phil,
using GRE tunnels to build an overlay would deny one of the greatest benefits of MPLS L3 VPN: the peer model where each CE talks only with local PE node.
unless you have a small number of sites this approach is not recommended.
What if a new site is added in the future? you would need to configure a tunnel GRE to the new site in each of the existing sites.
You could run a DMVPN ( that is to use mGRE) to solve this but it has some complexity.
You can run BGP without using mutual redistribution: BGP allows to advertise internal networks using the network command even if they are not directly connected to the CE router but learned via EIGRP.
So it is enough to redistribute only BGP into EIGRP by setting a default seed metric (it requires five values in EIGRP and it is necessary or redistribution will not occur)
router bgp 65001
neigh PE-address remote-as SP-AS-number
network 10.10.10.0 mask 255.255.255.0
network 10.10.20.0 mask 255.255.254.0
no auto-summary
! note:if auto-summary is disabled you need to provide the exact mask / prefix length
router eigrp 100
redistribute bgp 65001
default-metric 10000 1000 255 1 1500
! BW delay reliabilty load MTU
Hope to help
Giuseppe

Router EIGRP updates question

Router A
interface eth 0
ip address 172.30.0.1 255.255.255.128
router eigrp 4444
network 172.30.1.0
Router B
interface eth0
ip address 172.30.2.1 255.255.255.128
router eigrp 4444
network 172.30.1.0
MAIN ROUTER
interface eth0
ip address 172.30.1.1 255.255.255.0
router eigrp 4444
network 172.30.0.0
Router A users should reach ONLY Main Router users.
Router B users should reach ONLY Main Router users.
based on the EIGRP network in Router A & B, they can reach ONLY Main Router users, where as Main Router can reach both.
am i right? if not please correct me.

Hello,
in addition to Abd's post, keep in mind that with EIGRP, you are not actually advertising networks, you are advertising interfaces. So, when you say:
network 172.30.0.0
you tell the EIGRP process to let all interfaces that have an IP address within the 172.30.0.0/16 range participate in EIGRP. In order to avoid confusion, you could advertise just the exact interface addresses as following:
Router A
interface eth 0
ip address 172.30.0.1 255.255.255.128
router eigrp 4444
network 172.30.0.1 0.0.0.0
Router B
interface eth0
ip address 172.30.2.1 255.255.255.128
router eigrp 4444
network 172.30.2.1 0.0.0.0
MAIN ROUTER
interface eth0
ip address 172.30.1.1 255.255.255.0
router eigrp 4444
network 172.30.1.1 0.0.0.0
If you want both Router A and Router B to reach only the main router and not each other, you could configure a distribute list for the interfaces on Router A and Router B as following:
Router A
interface Serial0
description connection to Main
router eigrp 444
distribute-list 1 out Serial0
access-list 1 deny 172.30.2.1 0.0.0.0
access-list 1 permit any
Router B
interface Serial0
description connection to Main
router eigrp 444
distribute-list 1 out Serial0
access-list 1 deny 172.30.0.1 0.0.0.0
access-list 1 permit any
Does that make sense ?
Regards,
GNT

To Clear A PAssive EIGRP Route

We have a Cisco router which has learned an incorrect passive eigrp route; we would like to clear this route from the router but don't know how.
We'd like to avoid rebooting the router if possible.
Any info on this is appreciated.

Hello,
where from the route was injected into EIGRP? As long as the route is injected it will be announced to all EIGRP routers. "Passive" means just, that the route is learned and no queries are unanswered. This is the normal state of any route in EIGRP.
So to get rid of the route you should have a look at the router injecting it and reconfigure it to not advertise it.
Hope this helps! please rate all posts.
Regards, Martin

Overwrite dynamic (eigrp) route when external dials into router

Hi
I would like to find a way to overwrite a dynamic (eigrp) route with a routing entry pointing to a dialer interface, when someone has dialed into this dialer interface.
Does someone of you knows a way how this can be done?
Thanks in advance and kind regards
Mark

Thanks tor you reply.
Until now I have heard of reverse route injection only in conjunction with setting up vpn connections. And a quick search doesn't shows much. But I keep on searching.
Maybe I should tell something more about my setup. There are 2 routers (both 2612). On the LAN side the do hsrp. And on the WAN side each of them has 2 BRI interfaces connected to a multi-line-hunting-group for dialin and dialout. On the LAN I do eigrp and so overwrite a static route pointing to the dialer on the second router because of an administrativ distance of 200 at the static route.
When dialing out everything works fine. But when someone dials in to the second router (which is the hsrp standby one) the routing table of this router isn't changed/updated. I Bad expected something like a "directly connected" event puts a new entry in the routing table pointing to the now connected dialer Interface. But this does not happen.
What I'm looking for is a way how this can be done, so that these is a backward pointing route on the hsrp standby router for the dialed in sides.
Is there a way to do this?
Regards
Mark

Eigrp routes

How would I stop eigrp routes being advertised so that it doesnt keep bringing up my isdn line, what do I put on the access list ?

access-list 100 deny eigrp any any
access-list 100 permit ip any any
!--- EIGRP routing packets are denied in the dialer-list.
!--- This prevents eigrp packets from keeping the link up.
!--- Adjust the interesting traffic depending on your traffic definitions.
dialer-list 1 protocol ip list 100
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk713/tk237/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800a3b77.shtml

Router-to-Router VPN Security

Hi there,
Should we worry about the the security on router-to-router VPN over internet (IPSec) ?
We have two offices.
Office A has Cisco 2811 router (internal, private) and ASA 5510 firewall.
Office B has Cisco 2821 router (internal, private) and ASA 5505 firewall.
Office B has private subnets that extend to 7 hops away. (running RIP)
If we want to set up a site-to-stie VPN between these two offices, should we set it up on ASA's or routers?
If we set up VPN on routers, does that mean we need to connect one interface to the internet on each router and suffer from Internet attacks?
How do we defend our routers then?
Thanks in advance!
-Andrew

Hi,
when it comes to site to site vpn I usually prefer routers. Whith a little bit of tweaking NAT and routing you should be able to operate a public address on the routers even if they are behind the firewall.
The advantage of IOS based VPN is e.g. the possibility of routing protocols through the VPN tunnels which would give another level of resiliency. Configure tunnel interfaces on the routers with a tunnel mode IPsec and a tunnel protection profile. You can then run e.g. EIGRP to find a possible alternate path if one of the tunnels fails. Its much easier than anything I can think of on the ASA.
Rgds, MiKa

Routes and Routes Determination

Hello All,
I m basically a technical person and i m doing recording for routes and routes determination.
I am facing one problem.
while executing transaction 0vtc in one system , while saving data its asking for transport request.
and when i execute the same transaction in IDES system , and when i save data it does not ask for the transport request.
Is there any config for that?
Please help me out...its required asap..
thanks,
jigs
Helpful ans will be rewarded.

Hi
not sure if this would help. but going through some of the older posts here, here's something I gathered:-
++++++++++++++++++++++
It also depends on the client settings, which is done by the BASIS guys. If the client settings are done in such a way that system should not generate requests then it will not generate a request.
If the system is created as a Sandbox then also system will not ask for a request.
using the T codes SE01 where all the list can be viewed , then select the task or transport request click on the trucj button .
+++++++++++++++++++++
hope it's a start

Difference between Routing & Rate Routing

Hi All,
can anyone tell me difference between Routing & Rate Routing? can we use routing for REM? if no, then what will be the effect?
Thanks,
Rinky

Hi Rinky ,
Routing and rate routing are task list in broad manner .
standard task list: Describes the worksteps necessary to produce a material or perform an activity without reference to an order.( that means they are created without reference to order )
Essential objects of a task list are header, operations, material component allocations, production resources/tools and inspection characteristics.
Together with specific dates and quantities, task list data forms an important part of the order.
The following task list types exist in the R/3 System:
routing
reference operation set
rate routing
reference rate routing
inspection plan
maintenance task list
standard network
master recipe
Routing is created with ca01 and rate routing by ca21 .
Routing is used in discrete manufacuting and rate routing in repetitive .
Rate routing generally has only one operation and prod line instead of work centers and operations in routings .
Both routings can be used for scheduling , cosing and capacity planning .
Hope this was helpful answer !
Neal
Edited by: Neal Gibson on Jun 30, 2008 11:46 AM

Routing & rate routing

hello everyone,
myself rekha bamgude,i want to know difference between routing & rate routing?

Hi rekha to get a quick (or any) response, create your new discussion in a space related to your query. This way it will be visible to topic experts who will then see and reply to it.
Please move this thread to the relevant forum Enterprise Resource Planning (SAP ERP)
as you mention
i want to know difference between routing & rate routing?
Many times we told this word (Search before you post ).
please see this thread for more details.
Difference between routing and rate routing
poorna

Routes and route groups expanded

Is there any way to force the routes and route groups to show un-expanded when I click on the Routes/Groups tab in switch executive? I have many and it is difficult to navigate when they are all expanded.
kph

Hi kphite,
At this time, there is no method to force the collapse of the routes and route groups. However, thank you for this product suggestion. Just so you know, we have previously considered the implementation of such a feature and agree that this functionality would be beneficial. We do have it in our plans for future revisions of NI Switch Executive.
Thanks again!
Chad Erickson
Switch Product Support Engineer
NI - USA

Router to Router Dialer VPN

one of my router is configured with site to site vpn, I want this router to establish a dialer vpn from a remote router,
Remote router will be configured as dialer vpn as there is no Live IP available in remote site, I dont want to configure it as Site to site vpn,
Please refer some docuement to achive this goal,

Hi Karsten -
I'm afraid I cannot use the EasyVPN feature at all.
The vendor informs me that there is another IPSec VPN tunnel which connects back to their office to provide other capabilities.
So I have to use L2L IPSec -- and do it with a dynamic IP from the router side, to a fixed IP on the ASA side.
Is it possible to build the tunnel-group on the ASA side so that it doesn't require a known IP for the remote side of the tunnel?
I'm using DefaultL2L tunnel group (on the ASA) at the moment to terminate the VPN when the router is using the satellite connection via FA90/1, with a fixed IP address.
But the DefaultL2L group doesn't have the IP of the router -- yet it works...
The same VPN config, used from the FA0/0 interface of the router with the same crypto map
just gives the traditional "No match, deleting SA" message..
I can see the router trying to establish the VPN, but it's just not able to negotiate, and the only reason I could think of was that the FA0/0 interface had a DHCP address instead of a static IP.
Strange that it works OK with the ASA's DefaultL2L tunnel group, with no mention of the router's FA0/1 static IP, yet the FA0/0 with a dynamic IP won't work.
We did just hook up the satellite and used FA0/1 to test it -- vpn came up instantly...

Router to Router VPN with Overlapping internal networks

Hello Experts,
One quick question. How do I configure a Router to Router VPN with overlapping internal networks???
Both of my internal networks have ip address of 192.168.10.0 and 192.168.10.0
Any link or config will be appreciated. I've been looking but no luck.
Thanks,
Randall

Randall,
Please refer the below URL for configuration details:
Configuring an IPSec Tunnel Between Routers with Duplicate LAN Subnets
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk583/tk372/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800b07ed.shtml
Let me know if it helps.
Regards,
Arul
** Please rate all helpful posts **

ISR router EIGRP Route Tag

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for