[c-nsp] Cisco-Cisco RSVP-TE Trouble

[Eric Osborne]

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

Per Ole Klemetsrud wrote:
> Does anyone know what "Removal Trigger: path verification failed" 
> means:

It means that the last instantiation of this LSP (not the one that's
currently been up for 12:32) went down because the explicit path you
have configured couldn't be matched against the TE database; most likely
due to a link flap.

> 
> show mpls traffic-eng tunnels tunnel 0
> <snip>
>     History:
>      Tunnel:
>        Time since created: 49 days, 17 hours, 2 minutes
>        Time since path change: 12 minutes, 31 seconds
>      Current LSP:
>        Uptime: 12 minutes, 32 seconds
>        Selection: reoptimation
>      Prior LSP:
>        ID: path option 1 [2372]
>        Removal Trigger: path verification failed
> 
> This is the only cisco-cisco RSVP-TE link in my network, and this tunnel 
> has failed on me 3 times in two months.  When I do a show ip cef x.x.x.x 
> (x is far end LSP endpoint), I see that the imposed label differs from the 
> expected incoming label for that LSP on the next-hop router (Juniper M).
> 

Check to make sure that you're really looking at the tunnel label, and
not an LDP-learned label that's sent *inside* the tunnel.  We treat a
tunnel as far more of an interface than some others do, which can be
confusing if you're not used to it.

What do you mean by 'tunnel has failed on me'?  Has it gone down?
Stayed up but blackholed traffic?  Other?

> Another issue that is quite annoying is that the Cisco uses protocol 0 AND 
> Dport 0 for this LSP (which is clearly not RFC compliant), shown by "show 
> ip rsvp sender", causing excessive log entries on the P routers on the 
> way complaining about this.

There are two ways to send RSVP across a link; inside UDP, or raw on the
link.  We don't do the UDP one, at least not for TE.  Protocol type
should be 46 for raw RSVP.  Until proven otherwise I'd have to say this
is a cosmetic bug, because if we were really putting the wrong protocol
type on the packet the tunnel would never come up.  What kind of
complaints are you getting on the P router?  What does 'deb ip pack' for
these packets show?  Can you send the exact output of 'sh ip rsvp sender'?



eric

> 
> Both boxes are 7200 with NPE-G1, running 12.2(18)S3.  Anyone running a 
> mixed rsvp-te environment with similar experiences?
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Per Ole Klemetsrud
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)

iD8DBQFCG/zOYR4YGS5xhWIRAlfEAJ9eUCiVsDyH3NH2FeKuNtowNbUkHACeP9bD
WCL5QGJr82F738eUuHW6CpY=
=ylh7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----