I know that “RIB failure” in a “show ip bgp” output indicates that a route offered to the RIB by BGP has not been accepted.
But why then the connected Routes that are being advertised by the BGP network/mask command in the local router, is not shown as "r" (rib failure) in the BGP table?.
Instead I get it as *> 192.168.0.4/32 0.0.0.0
Connected routes always wins (comparing with any Protocols-IGB/BGP).
So in this case BGP is failing to compete to insert the connect route in the RIB.
Configuration are as below:
Sh run int lo0
interface Loopback0
ip address 192.168.0.4 255.255.255.255
end
sh run | s bgp
router bgp 65234
bgp router-id 4.4.4.4
bgp log-neighbor-changes
no bgp default ipv4-unicast
neighbor 192.168.0.3 remote-as 65234
neighbor 192.168.0.3 update-source Loopback0
!
address-family ipv4
network 192.168.0.4 mask 255.255.255.255
neighbor 192.168.0.3 activate
exit-address-family
sh version
Cisco IOS Software, IOSv Software (VIOS-ADVENTERPRISEK9-M), Version 15.6(2)T
Thanks in Advance,
Sajith
Best Answer
The difference is that R4 is originating the route to 192.168.0.4/32 (with the network statement), whereas the route to 192.168.0.2/32 is being received from another BGP router.
As BGP on R4 is originating the 192.168.0.4/32 route it would never attempt to install it in its routing table as it has a better local route that it sourced the information from. It will advertise this route to other BGP routers, but would not use it itself as it is the originator of the route.
The route to 192.168.0.2/32 on the other hand was received from another router via BGP and also another protocol. The other protocol had a lower AD so a RIB failure is shown in BGP for that route.