Comware Based
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

How to change the OSPF Tag for internal routes

 
BROCHART_1
Occasional Contributor

How to change the OSPF Tag for internal routes

Hello,

I would like to have my swicthes HPE 5500 HI (comware 5.20.99 R5501P35) & HPE 5500 EI (comware 5.20.99 R2222P08) advertising their internal routes (2 VLANS) with a tag of 10 instead of the default tag 0.

Example of the ospf config in one switch.

#

ospf 1 router-id 192.168.100.247
 default tag 10
 default-route-advertise permit-calculate-other
 import-route static
 import-route ospf all-processes
 area 0.0.0.0
  network 10.168.20.0 0.0.1.255
  network 192.168.10.0 0.0.0.255

#
vlan 1
#
vlan 10
#
vlan 600

#
interface Vlan-interface10
 description production
 ip address 192.168.10.247 255.255.255.0
#
interface Vlan-interface600
 ip address 10.168.21.247 255.255.254.0
#

#

Can someone help me. Any help would be appreciated

Kind regards

2 REPLIES
BROCHART_1
Occasional Contributor

Re: How to change the OSPF Tag for internal routes

Hello,

I'm still needing help on this :(

The reason for the request is we are blocked from having our new networks availables through an ISP cloud. They uses BGP and do filter the authorized routes the by the ospf tag. In our case, on each site we have added a new vlan with its own network for VoIP. But the new network routes advertised internally (on each site) are not communicated to the other sites because their tag is 0. 

Unfortunately for us, the ISP supports only cisco configuration :( :( :(

BROCHART_1
Occasional Contributor

Re: How to change the OSPF Tag for internal routes

I think I found a solution.

I removed the network statements from the ospf 1 process, I started a second ospf process and registered the network in the area 0 of that new process.

On the primary process I used the command "import-route direct route-policy TAG10" to have the route imported and advertised with a modified tag. The network is now advertised on our other sites. :-)

Can someone validate this or point any potential issue on this?

Kind regards