I've seen this happen with Juniper peers, but not with Cisco. It is definitely a bug. chris

-----Original Message----- From: John Fraizer [mailto:nanog@Overkill.EnterZone.Net] Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 2:47 PM To: nanog@merit.edu Subject: Possible IOS bug w/respect to incorrect nexthop advert

One of our peers recently upgraded to IOS to:

Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software IOS (tm) RSP Software (RSP-PV-M), Version 12.1(4)E, EARLY DEPLOYMENT RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) Copyright (c) 1986-2000 by cisco Systems, Inc. Compiled Tue 07-Nov-00 14:23 by eaarmas Image text-base: 0x60010958, data-base: 0x60F7C000

ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 11.1(8)CA1, EARLY DEPLOYMENT RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) BOOTFLASH: RSP Software (RSP-BOOT-M), Version 12.1(4)E, EARLY DEPLOYMENT RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)

Ever since this upgrade, we've been seeing the following behavior:

When they announce prefixes to us, sometimes they get it right, as in, the nexthop is set correctly and sometimes they get it wrong as in, the cisco picks a random address from it's configured addresses and sends the nexthop as that address.

Example getting it right:

2001/04/06 13:51:42 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE w/ attr: nexthop 209.115.127.21, origin i, path 6259 6461 11042 8390 8431 2001/04/06 13:51:42 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd 195.230.6.0/24 2001/04/06 13:51:42 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd 195.230.7.0/24

Examples getting it wrong:

2001/04/06 13:52:10 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE w/ attr: nexthop 216.28.125.77, origin i, path 6259 3549 701 7871 2001/04/06 13:52:10 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE about 206.162.212.0/22 -- DENIED due to: non-connected next-hop;

2001/04/06 13:57:57 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE w/ attr: nexthop 216.28.126.221, origin i, path 6259 7018 14046 14046 2001/04/06 13:57:57 BGP: 209.115.127.21 rcvd UPDATE about 216.241.140.0/23 -- DENIED due to: non-connected next-hop;

This behavior began when the peer upgraded their IOS.

Is this a documented issue or has anyone else seen this behavior?

--- John Fraizer EnterZone, Inc