-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

Nikolai Abromov wrote: | Hi Bruce, | | | First - thanks for your reply I know about bgp condition , but I'm not | quite sure how to setup the rule and there is the problem | | | uplink1 uplink2 | | | | [router A] - [router B] | | | [customer] | | | and both uplinks are marked with community strings where first | uplinks is (xxx:001) the second is (xxx:002), I tried to made when the | routes from second | uplink disappear then advertise prefix-list which is in route-map | "advertize" to uplink1 | the configuration is something like this | | | route-map track-as1111, permit, sequence 10 | Match clauses: | community (community-list filter): 150 | Set clauses: | Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes | | | route-map advertize, permit, sequence 10 | Match clauses: | ip address prefix-lists: advertise-this | Set clauses: | Policy routing matches: 0 packets, 0 bytes | | | [..] | neighbor 192.168.1.1 advertise-map advertize non-exist-map track-as1111 | | .. | | | so it's that possible or I do something wrong? | | |

I don't see any restrictions on what can be in the route-map. You didn't include your community list, so I can't see if there is a syntax problem there.

However, doing a community match will yield lots of matches. Normally with the non-exist map you attempt to match a single learned route that you want to track. Could you narrow it down and use an address match in the route map instead?

- -- ========= bep

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFB+owJE1XcgMgrtyYRAjIrAKCCMNCE2s5LMG50nVgIZ3Mz4DnUrwCeMeZC Usg0647TzjGxbMyy6391ZZA= =0qru -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----