Cisco WAN :: 1921 OSPF To Two Routers Sending Default Route From Failover
May 28, 2013
Have a 1921 that has 3 eth connections (1 LAN, and 2 WAN) - I have 2 seperate OSPF processes (2 areas) on the WAN Ints - both upstream WAN's are sending defaults back to the 1921, and the 1921 is sending it's LAN range to them.
I have ip ospf cost 150 set on the "failover" WAN connection interface (Both on the 1921 and upstream), but the 1921 is preferring the default route from the "failover"?
The default routes are both being received by the 1921, but it's preferring the "failover" Int with the ip ospf cost 150 configured?
Looking through the SPROUTE course material they state on several occasions that an ABR will announce a default route in to a standard NSSA area, same as a stub area, because LSA5 external routes are not allowed.
I'm working on a little OSPF setup in my lab and having a problem pinging out to the internet.I have a setup with (3) 3550's running ip routing. I'm configuring OSPF but I can't ping the internet from any L3 switch except the switch with the actual uplink to the internet.[code] From SW2 and SW3, I can ping SW1 on all IPs (192.168.1.90, 10.10.10.1, 10.10.10.5) but I can't ping 192.168.1.1 which is my gateway to the internet.
Since the ACE supports only static routing, when pointing a default route from the ACE what is your preferred method when using multiple 6500s with an ACE in each in a failover scenario to prevent just pointing at one 6500? Static route to an HSRP address? Multiple static routes on the ACE, etc?
I have 2 ASBR routers, AGFR01RTR03 and AGFR02RTR03, performing OSPF to OSPF redistribution in both ways for the same ***. They also do summarization for our private addressing scheme. It is all working just fine for that part (neighbors, summarization, redistribution).
Let's focus on AGDC01RTR01 with a specific entry here (IP subnet is fake) :
Routing entry for 22.214.171.124/25 Known via "ospf 1000", distance 110, metric 300, type inter area Last update from 10.2.244.76 on GigabitEthernet5/1, 1d03h ago Routing Descriptor Blocks: * 10.2.244.76, from 10.2.1.249, 1d03h ago, via GigabitEthernet5/1 Route metric is 300, traffic share count is 1
I bought a WRVS400N v2 to be used as an access point. Currently it is hooked up on my switch via a trunk port and is able to communicate with my gateway. Whenever I try to access an IP subnet other then the local IP address of the WRVS, I get a network unreachable error. To fix this for my local networks, I added the appropriate static route to cover my local LANs and that seems to work now. I tried to add route 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0 using the web interface for internet access, but somehow it does not recognize this as a default route (quad zero!?). Does any know how I can set the default gateway in this router? Maybe, but hopefully not, I have to use the WAN port to create some kind of uplink and use one of the LAN ports to connect using the trunk port and route traffic for the clients over the WAN port .
Is it possible to send all traffic through site to site VPN using SRP521W (on the other site ASA) ? Lets say, traffic to Internet from branch through HQ - site to site VPN between branch and HQ. I've tried to set up destination crypto policy entry to 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 but it's not accepted. Firmware version is 1.01.26 (003)
I've enabled antispoof on all interfaces on asa 5510.If you start a traceroute to a network on the default route, everything works, since replies comes to an interface with route 0.0.0.0/0 defined.If you start a tracer route to a network that is NOT on the default route (let's assume coporate MPLS), you only get response from first carrier router, the other are discarded because of anti spoof violation.
I have ICMP inspection and icmp-error inspection enabled.
I currently have a set of firewalls in active standby configuration running an ospf process injecting a default route into the rest of my network.I noticed when i was testing the failover that the asa's do not actually pass the route tables on failover, thus forcing the need to wait for routes to converge and for the default route to be advertised back into the network. This of course is not acceptable.
Is there a way around this or do I have to setup static default routes on every device in my network. I am trying to avoid setting up default routes on all of the devices because due to the setup of my network I have equal cost links configured in the event of hardware or link failure. So the devices then see an advertised default route from multiple paths.
I have two switches and two ASA in active/standby as connected below. These devices are running OSPF 128 in one area (Area 0).I'm pinging from both laptops to each other both ways. The ASA has the latest "8.6.1-5" image. I've configured the firewall failover polltime to 1s with holdtime of 4s. Pings both ways OK.
I fail the primary firewall (ASA-ACTIVE). I get a 4 seconds ping loss which is expected (holdtime) however after 10 seconds of pings I get another outage which last anywhere between 5 and 15 seconds. I've done a fair amount of debugging and I did notice that the second outage occurs with the OSPF neighbor goes from "loading" to "full". This doesn't make any sense because the routing table is fully populated when going to “full”.
When perfoming a manual fail back (type failover active on ASA-ACTIVE), pings goes on for approximately 10seconds and then an outage between 5 to 15 seconds. Agsin this outage occurs when OSPF neighbor goes from "loading" to "full".I've tried debugging on the switches and found nothing.
why a subnet wouldn't be passed on to just one participating OSPF device?
I have two routers and an ASA, all of which are in area 0, it's a pretty simple config. The two routers are connected to some other devices (also in area 0) that pass of an external route to a particular subnet, let's call it 192.168.4.0. The routers are getting it just fine, but the ASA is not:
I have a laptop computer with windows 7 and im having trouble connecting to my wireless internet. It says that im receiving packets but not sending them. I have tried to troubleshoot the problem and it says that the default gateway is not available. I am not sure what is happening with it, it started having problems while at a starbucks, and now the wireless and the LAN is not working on it.
Cisco device is neighbored up with a Brocade device via OSPF, and the desired routes are present.This Brocade device is neighbored up with another Brocade device via OSPF over a GRE tunnel. I am not seeing the desired routes present.What kinds of things can I look at to determine the issue? I think I've viewed the OSPF topology database (I'm not that familiar with Brocade) with the show ip ospf routes command and I'm not seeing the desired routes there either.There is no form of route filtering in place. I'll double check, but I do not believe there is any stub routing going on either.
I want to filter down the routes so only a set of specific routes is redistributed.. we have done this in the past with EIGRP by doing a route-map / prefix-list to manage the routes passed into EIGRP.My question is I can replicate the metric and the metric-type in the route-map by doing the following: [code] Do I need to be concerned witht the "subnets" command in this design? What I understand "Subnets".When redistributing routes into OSPF, only routes that are not subnetted are redistributed if the subnets keyword is not specified. I suspect I need to add it! So my final code should look like this..
I am getting this error on my PIX 535 with 8.0.4 code. The error is Error : OSPF/RIP cannot be enabled on failover interface, I am getting this error while trying to enable RIP on the firewall. The context is single mode and failover is enabled. When I am disabling the failover the Firewall is accepting the RIP configurations.
sample configuration for internet failover . i have 2 ISPs with one coming in thought a serial cable and another through internet and would wish one take over after the other has failed .The router is Cisco 1921 .
I am using a Cisco 1921 with a Verizon 4G LTE card installed. The primary connection is a Cable Modem with the 4G LTE acting as the backup. I've setup a track on the static route to the primary ISP. I'm having multiple issues. Initially I used the Gig 0/0 int instead of a Loopback address for the IP SLA source. The IP SLA traffic would be sent to the cellular interface and cause an IP source violation and the interface would flap. Then I used the Loopback and I could not get the route to fail back when the connection came back up. Even with the Loopback as the source for IP SLA I'm still getting flapping and I think that is a NAT configuration issue. I've applied an access-group on the cellular interface to try to fix the ip source violation issues, but it doesn't appear to work. The IP-SLA-POLICY route map is an attempt to force the IP SLA traffic to the primary interface. [code]
I m using ospf between HO and Branches for two links. branch router are 2811 and HO router 3845. when i enable ospf at branch i get all branch route like HO router and a default route. My requirement is each branch get only HO but no other branch. I have no default route.
I attached show ip route status for a branch router.. Why default route comes and why all branch's route come ?
I have an MPLS router that connects to the core network.This router distributes (per route maps) routes from OSPF into BGP and from BGP into OSPF.The OSPF Process conencts a 6509 to the 7206 MPLS router. There are some routes in the OSPF process that I have filtered out of the 6509. They do not show up inthe 6509 at all and this is the only way they can be getting into the 7206.Checking the 6509 database, this route is gone, but it stays in the 7206 until I clear the route manually. The result is the route still gets distributed into MPLS. [code]
One thing to note, there are two possible OSPF paths the route gets into OSPF, one of them, the route is filtered with distribute-list on the 6509, which means it is still in the database, so it is still in the 7206 database, and still get distributed into BGP on the 7206, correct?
I have two ospf processes running on a single 3570 edge router that has a dedicated transport circuit back to our network core. We are adding an additional "transport" only circuit into a new location that is also apart of the second ospf process backbone which will connect back to our core. There will also be a 3750 for this new circuit termination. Currently we are only redistributing ospf process 2 into ospf process 1 (1 = core backbone).
#router ospf 1 #redistribute ospf 2 subnet
We have no need to have ospf process 1 redistributed into the process 2 tables. That being said, when we add an additional transport ciruit, or path back to our core backbone, will this configuration present any issues with the redistribution process and failover.
I have a 1921 router with two wan interface configured, one is primary and the other is standby or backup in case the primary goes down, I was able to configure links to failover from primary to backup once there primary is down, but how do I configure to make sure when primary is up it failbak to to it. [code]
I have a Cisco 2620XM Router, running ver. 12.2 (7r). I have OSPF connected, however the OSPF routes are not populating in the sh ip route display. The neighbor relationship is established. The sh ip ospf database does display the other routers running ospf, however only connected (C) and static (S) routes appear.
We have Cisco 1921 routers that a provider is using for MPLS. They have it configured so that all internet trafic is passed to an internal ip address that is our proxy server. However, they are pushing all of the routing rules down to the workstation which is causing the local route tables to grow to be massive in a very short time.
For example, the second I ping a website, the ip address is resolved and then the route is added for the source ip address with the default gateway of the proxy server.
Is this normal? I would have thought that all the rules would have been handled by the router and let it keep the table entries.
Lately we have been comsidering an upgrade in our organization involving a 1921 router. The main role it will play is a load balancer/failover between 2 connections from 2 different ISPs. what additions are required to be added to this piece of equipment to make the configuration work. Im researching the matter now and it seems an extra card whould be purchased in addition to the router. Also, i cant seem to find much information on the available licenses to go with the router. will i need a special license to utilize the balancer/failover feature? (ip base, data, SEC).
We have a 14 offfice MPLS network. All offices have Cisco 3750s running OSPF which replicate route tables via our providers BGP peers. I am introducing a new network in our SF office which is not directly connected so in SF we have a static route "ip route 172.16.20.0 255.255.255.0 192.168.100.1. I want our other offices to learn this route route via OSPF so that they know how to get to the new network. My problem is that of course remote sites do not see our static routes and i have tried to add this via ospf but the switch will not propagate this route because it is not directly connected to the switch in SF.
router ospf 1 log-adjacency-changes network 10.2.0.0 0.0.0.255 area 126.96.36.199
I have a Catalyst switch that is redistributing some static routes into OSPF. These are received on a Nexus 7K and appear in the database however the 7K does not add them to its routing table, one of the routes is ignored and not added. I haven't got a clue why this is happening.
The routes on the Catalyst are as follows with ID of 172.30.255.22:
ip route 172.24.59.0 255.255.255.0 10.56.7.46 ip route 192.168.168.0 255.255.255.0 10.56.7.62
We are using a CISCO1921-SEC (ISR) with IOS 15.1 and we configured a "crypto isakmp client configuration group". We can connect with the "Cisco System VPN Client Version 5.0.07.0410" via IPSec/UDP.
1. Is it possible to push routing informations to the System running the VPN Client ? A the moment all traffic is routed to the tunnel but we like only one route to the network permitted with "pool ..." in the "crypto isakmp client configuration group NAME" section.
2. We searched for changing from upd connection to tcp connection via special port. Is it possible with IOS 15.1 on the CISCO1921-SEC ? Is there something possible like "iskamp ipsec-over-tcp port 10000" ?