nanog mailing list archives

gated.conf


From: Joe Shaw <jshaw () insync net>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 1997 18:02:57 -0500 (CDT)


Ok, thanks to all the people who helped me out with my gated.conf
problems.  Although not exactly what I needed to know at the time, it did
teach me a lot about what I was trying to do, and the rest came a little
easier.  One problem I'm having, is I've got several regular expression
statemenst I'm trying to use to filter my routes to one of my upstream
carriers.  I had a t1 to this upstream to test out how much we liked their
network, and now we're moving up to oc-3 to them.  What we've done is
purchased a GRF for this link, and run the ATM into it.  I'd like to
duplicate the as-path access-list for the oc-3.  The Cisco config 
follows.

ip as-path access-list 31 deny _3831_
ip as-path access-list 31 deny _701_
ip as-path access-list 31 deny _114_
ip as-path access-list 31 deny _6302_
ip as-path access-list 31 deny ^4259 .*
ip as-path access-list 31 deny ^3817 .*
ip as-path access-list 31 permit .*

These do the job on my network, and I'm happy with them.  
On the GRF, I've done this to try and duplicate them:

export proto bgp as 3831 {
        proto bgp aspath 3831 origin any
        {
        all restrict;
        };
        proto bgp aspath 701 origin any
        {
        all restrict:
        };
        proto bgp aspath 6302 origin any
        {
        all restrict:
        };
        proto bgp aspath 4259 .* origin any
        {
        all restrict;
        };
        proto bgp aspath 3817 .* origin any
        {
        all restrict;
        };
        proto bgp aspath .* origin any
        {
        all
        };
};

Could someone please explain to me why this doesn't work?  I'm at wits
end.  For some reason, I've gotten no response from the gated mailing
list, and I really haven't had the time till now to check why.  Any help
would definitely be appreciated.

Joe Shaw - jshaw () insync net
NetAdmin - Insync Internet Services
#!/usr/bin/perl 
# Standard Disclaimer to keep Joe from getting in trouble again.
print ("                   ***Disclaimer***\n");
print (" The opinions of Joe Shaw are not necessarily those of Insync\n");
print (" Internet Services or of any of it's other employees.  If you\n");
print (" wish to quote me on anything, please feel free, but remove\n");
print (" Insync's name from it.\n"); 
"Learn more, and you will never starve." - Paraphrase of Lee


On 9 Sep 1997, Michael Shields wrote:

In article <199709092102.RAA18271 () Iodine Mlink NET>,
Phillip Vandry <vandry () Mlink NET> wrote:
Maybe that should be even more the standard practice. There is nothing to
lose in allocating in the order .0, .128, .64, .192, .32, .96, .160,
.224 instead of .0, .32, .64, .96, .128, .160, .192, .224.

Sounds similar to what was suggested in RFC 1219 over six years ago.
-- 
Shields, CrossLink.




Current thread: