BGP Received Routes Command

[Ironman]

Hey everyone, so I been doing some reading and I am trying to find out the difference between the following 2 BGP (Cisco) Commands:

Code Select Expand

show ip bgp neighbor x.x.x.x received-routes

Code Select Expand

show ip bgp neighbor x.x.x.x routes

I come across a lot of production routers not having the soft-reconfiguration inbound command so the received-routes command does not work. I have always just used the routes command. Am I overlooking something? Are these not the same commands in essence?

Code Select Expand

TEST_R2#sho ip bgp nei 1.1.1.1 received-routes
BGP table version is 8, local router ID is 172.19.1.1
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter,
              x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed,
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found

     Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
r>  1.1.1.1/32       1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 ?
*>  172.16.1.0/24    1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 i
*>  172.17.1.0/24    1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 i
*   192.168.0.0/30   1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 ?

Total number of prefixes 4

TEST_R2#sho ip bgp nei 1.1.1.1 routes
BGP table version is 8, local router ID is 172.19.1.1
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter,
              x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed,
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found

     Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
r>  1.1.1.1/32       1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 ?
*>  172.16.1.0/24    1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 i
*>  172.17.1.0/24    1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 i
*   192.168.0.0/30   1.1.1.1                  0             0 65001 ?

Total number of prefixes 4

[packetherder]

First one is pre-filtering and the other post, iirc.

[Ironman]

So Routes-Received shows routes placed in the routing table and just routes shows all routes learned?

[wintermute000]

No.... not what he said

To recap:
http://ccie-in-3-months.blogspot.com/2008/04/bgp-how-to-display-incomingoutgoing.html


IMO this is pretty much the only advantage to soft-reconfiguration inbound vs route-refresh

[Ironman]

No.... not what he said

To recap:
http://ccie-in-3-months.blogspot.com/2008/04/bgp-how-to-display-incomingoutgoing.html


IMO this is pretty much the only advantage to soft-reconfiguration inbound vs route-refresh

Ahhhh, thanks for the link! So the show routes command shows just what was placed into the routing table vs the received-routes which shows all routes received and has indicators showing how BGP treats that prefix. Thanks for the clarification!

[srg]

No.... not what he said

To recap:
http://ccie-in-3-months.blogspot.com/2008/04/bgp-how-to-display-incomingoutgoing.html


IMO this is pretty much the only advantage to soft-reconfiguration inbound vs route-refresh

Ahhhh, thanks for the link! So the show routes command shows just what was placed into the routing table vs the received-routes which shows all routes received and has indicators showing how BGP treats that prefix. Thanks for the clarification!

No they basically show the same things with the difference that 'received-routes' are pre local filtering in adj-RIB-in and 'routes' are post local filtering from loc-RIB. Neither are not necessarily placed in the actual routing table.

[wintermute000]

yeah, drill it into your head: BGP table is NOT the routing table. BGP routes will fight it out in the BGP table before entering the RiB.
You'll come to love it and wonder why the heck other protocols don't give you this wonderful resource (well they sort of do, but the OSPF database is really cryptic by comparison!)

[Ironman]

I agree with the OSPF database being cryptic. I do like the EIGRP topology table.

Anyways, thanks the hints fellas!

[burnyd]

This was very confusing to me as well when I used XR for the first time.

[srg]

This was very confusing to me as well when I used XR for the first time.

How is this different in XR?