Annoying OSPF bug - IOSv 15.6(2)T ?

It seems to me that I've encountered an annoying bug in IOSv 15.6(2)T that has to do with OSPF not displaying the "Routing Bit Set on this LSA in topology Base with MTID 0" message when examining the details of the LSDB.

I've tried a few things to see if this was some transient issue, but I haven't been able to restore normalcy (restarting the OSPF process, restarting IOSv, simplifying the topology, etc). I've also reproduced the topology with IOU 15.4(1)T, which produces the appropriate LSDB output in regards to "Routing Bit Set on this LSA in topology Base with MTID 0".

Perhaps someone with better access to the Cisco Bug database, or who may know if this change was deliberate could chime in?

It's not a show-stopper by any means, other than a useful troubleshooting tidbit, and routing within the topology seems to function as expected. Just a curiosity.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mistabrumley89

I couldn't find anything on this issue with the Bug Search Tool.
Maybe I did it wrong, or maybe it hasn't been reported. Idk.

rtid

I didn't see anything within any document linked from the Release Notes either (which includes new features, bugs in related versions, etc): Cross-Platform Release Notes for Cisco IOS Release 15.6M&T - Cisco

atorven

Hate to ask an obvious question but are you sure that this is definitely a bug? There are some legitimate cases where the routing bit wouldn’t set, is this one of them?

rtid

atorven wrote: »

Hate to ask an obvious question but are you sure that this is definitely a bug? There are some legitimate cases where the routing bit wouldn’t set, is this one of them?

Yes, this is a bug or an intended change. As noted above, I've replicated the topology as well as tried simplified topologies where the output should manifest itself under normal operation (and does on other versions of code). I have yet to try an older version of IOSv, or a multi-topology (and likely won't, as it's doesn't warrant that deep of a dive).

networker050184

It certainly wouldn't be the first time I've seen show command output change between versions.