[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       juniper-nsp
Subject:    Re: [j-nsp] =?utf-8?q?IPv6_static_default_route_in_routing_instance?=
From:       Gordon Smith <gordon () gswsystems ! com>
Date:       2012-06-13 22:28:36
Message-ID: 94656e54eb50492a5f44d4127bca9378 () gswsystems ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

 A downgrade from 11.4R2.14 to 11.2R7.4 fixed the problem.
 I now see a v6 default route in the vrf...

 Grrrr... Thats a pretty big bug to be in the second code revision of 
 that train


 On Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:33:26 -0600, Stacy W. Smith wrote:
> Please provide the output of
>
> show route table dmz.inet6.0 xxxx:a500:0:2::1
>
> Thanks,
> --Stacy
>
> On Jun 12, 2012, at 11:48 PM, Gordon Smith wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just wondering if anybody's come across this before - default IPv6 
>> static not appearing in the routing instance inet6 table...
>>
>> Instance is a VRF:
>>
>> instance-type vrf;
>> interface ge-1/1/0.503;
>> interface ge-1/1/0.504;
>> route-distinguisher 56263:101;
>> vrf-import [ reject-all ];
>> vrf-export [ reject-all ];
>> vrf-table-label;
>> routing-options {
>>    graceful-restart;
>>    rib dmz.inet6.0 {
>>        static {
>>            route ::/0 next-hop xxxx:a500:0:2::1;
>>        }
>>    }
>>    static {
>>        route 0.0.0.0/0 {
>>            next-hop xxx.x.216.54;
>>            no-readvertise;
>>        }
>>    }
>> }
>>
>>
>> Looking at the dmz.inet6.0 table shows directly connected routes, 
>> but not the default.
>> In contrast, dmz.inet.0 has a v4 default as expected.
>>
>> I must be doing something wrong here....
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]