🚀 go-pugleaf

-Excellent- diagnosis.  I rarely see a customer report as detailed as the one
you submitted.  You're absolutely correct.  The split horizon logic put into
8.3(3) and 9.0(1) broke routing updates exactly as you specified.

I wrote a fix for it (CSCdi06205) a couple of weeks ago,  but it hasn't been
included in any production release yet.

Please contact a CE and ask them to keep an eye on this bug and ship you
a copy of the next beta-release with this fix in it.  I'm surprised that
this hasn't made it into 8.3 and 9.0 yet.

Regards,
Paul

  From: Ivan Pepelnjak <Ivan.Pepelnjak@nil.yu>
  Subject: Problems using unnumbered serial interfaces in 9.0(1)
  Hello !
  
  I have encountered a serious IP routing problem when using unnumbered
  serial interfaces with RIP in release 9.0(1). Consider the following
  simple network :
  
    network A (192.84.104.0)              network B (192.84.105.0)
  ===========================             ============================
               !                                   !                 
           +---------+     serial link         +---------+           
           |  IGS/R  | <---------------------> |  IGS/R  |           
           +---------+                         +---------+           
  
  With SW release 8.3 all you have to do was a simple setup similar to
  
  	interface ether 0
  	ip address 192.84.104.10
  	interface serial 0
  	ip unnumbered ether 0
  	router rip
  	network 192.84.104.0
  	network 192.84.105.0
  
  However, when using the same configuration with release 9.0(1), the
  Ethernet network is not announced across the serial link. Evidently
  the router thinks that the serial interface belongs to the same network
  and thanks to new split-horizon logic does not announce network A or B
  across the serial line (debug ip-rip output shows "RIP update suppressed").
  
  Turning the split-horizon off helps a bit, but not when you are in 
  mixed versions environment (a mixture of 8.3 and 9.0). Numbering the
  serial line with IP addresses from yet another class-C network solves
  the problem (technically but surely not organisationally).
  
  Has anybody encountered anything like that with 9.0(1) or am I doing
  something wrong ?
  
  Ivan
  
  Ivan Pepelnjak					Phone : +38 61 372-713
  Technical manager				FAX:	+38 61 372-809
  NIL, Systems integration and Consulting		E-Mail:	pipi@nil.yu
>>	
  Ljubljana, Slovenia