[c-nsp] 12.2(25)S - EoMPLS portmode (xconnect) over RSVP-TE LSP?

[Aditya Kaul]

Hi Lars,
             For a Martini ckt to work over TE-LSP you need to map the IGP 
label(PE loopback) which in your case is 1.1.1.2 via TE-Tunnel.

You can do that by pointing static route for the PE-loopback via Tu0 or do 
autoroute announce(IGP shortcut).
You have to the same at TE tailend as the LSP's are unidirectional.

Rgds
Aditya

ip route 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.255 tu 0

int tu0
tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute-announce


At 04:32 PM 8/24/2004, Lars Erik Gullerud wrote:
>Hi guys,
>
>We have a 7200 NPE-G1 PE-router from which we would like to set up a
>port-mode EoMPLS circuit. This router has an established RSVP-TE LSP (on
>interface Tunnel1) and targeted LDP session to the remote PE for this
>circuit.
>
>However, how is it possible to make the router actually choose the
>RSVP-TE LSP as valid for the default path for this EoMPLS circuit? The
>router in question does not use flooded LDP, only RSVP-TE LSPs and
>targeted LDP sessions.
>
>If we configure as follows, the circuit does NOT come up (here the
>remote PE is 1.1.1.2 and VCID is 1001:
>
>interface GigabitEthernet0/2
>  xconnect 1.1.1.2 1001 encapsulation mpls
>
>However, by manually configuring a preferred path through the use of a
>pseudowire-class, the circuit works fine:
>
>pseudowire-class portmode
>  encapsulation mpls
>  preferred-path interface Tunnel1 disable-fallback
>!
>interface GigabitEthernet0/2
>  xconnect 1.1.1.2 1001 pw-class portmode
>
>Now, you might ask, "why not just use this method then"? Answer -
>because the config above, while perfectly OK on routers running
>12.0(28|29)S, is not available on 12.2(25)S. According to the 12.2(25)S
>release notes, the EoMPLS portmode features were integrated into
>12.2(25)S - and indeed, the xconnect syntax and all the other
>pseudowire-class stuff is available, but the option to specify a
>preferred-path in the pw-class is not there:
>
>12-2-25S-router(config-pw-class)#preferred-path ?
>% Unrecognized command
>
>So, while we can indeed use the pw-class syntax on the xconnect config
>for the interface, it makes zero difference on the outcome, as we still
>can not choose a path in the pw-class. The router does however seem to
>be aware of the notion of having a preferred-path:
>
>12-2-25S-router#show mpls l2transport vc detail
>Local interface: Gi0/2 up, line protocol up, Ethernet up
>   Destination address: 1.1.1.2, VC ID: 1001, VC status: down
>     Output interface: none, imposed label stack {}
>     Preferred path: not configured
>     Default path: active
>     Tunnel label: 0, no adjacency
>   Create time: 23:52:32, last status change time: 23:29:50
>   Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 1.1.1.2:0 up
>     MPLS VC labels: local 1270, remote 114880
>     Group ID: local 0, remote 0
>     MTU: local 1546, remote 1546
>
>So, since some bright flame over at Cisco apparently forgot to merge in
>the Tunnel Selection part, i.e. the "preferred-path" CLI option in the
>pw-class, into 12.2(25)S - is there any way to actually make this router
>understand that the TE-tunnel is a valid path for this EoMPLS-link, and
>thereby choose that as its "default path"? Or do we have to bite the
>bullet and "downgrade" this router to 12.0(29)S (although I know some
>would call this an upgrade...)?
>
>I have tried setting the TE tunnel up as a forwarding-adjacency (tunnel
>mpls traffic-eng forwarding-adjacency) in case that made any difference
>- which it did not. Any other suggestions on stuff I might try to make
>this work, apart from using Juniper's trade-in program and sticking an
>M7i at that site instead?
>
>Thank you in advance for any suggestions on this, as I would like to
>avoid going back to 12.0S for this particular router, and the M7i option
>would take to long for this particular link... :)
>
>/leg
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/