[c-nsp] EoMPLS from ME3750 to 7201 GigE sub-int

[Justin Shore]

Rado,

Thanks for the reply.  That's a very useful doc.  In my particular 
situation I'm trying to set the MTU on an Ethernet sub-interface.  It 
would appear that this isn't possible (though it would be useful if one 
could at least fake it and get the VC up when you know that closer to 
the edge you're taking care of enforcing a set MTU.  That doc will 
definitely come in handy though.

Thanks for the input
  Justin


Rado Vasilev wrote:
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_any_transport_ps6350_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html#wp1187367 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 18 Jan 2009, at 02:31, Chris Phillips wrote:
> 
>> Rado,
>>
>> nyc1(config)#int te1/2.1254
>> nyc1(config-subif)#mtu ?
>>  <9216-9216>  MTU size in bytes
>>
>> nyc1(config-subif)#mtu 9216 ?
>>  <cr>
>>
>> nyc1(config-subif)#mtu 9216
>> % Sub-interface TenGigabitEthernet1/2.1254 does not support user 
>> settable mtu
>>
>> Afaik, all sub-interfaces assume the MTU of the primary physical port, 
>> and that this cannot be changed.
>>
>> Rado Vasilev wrote:
>>> Justin,
>>> You should be able to fix the MTU mismatch issue without changing the 
>>> interface/sub-interface MTU.
>>> conf t
>>> interface xxx/x.10
>>> xconnect ..
>>>    mtu xxx
>>> regards,
>>> Rado
>>> On 18 Jan 2009, at 01:41, Justin Shore wrote:
>>>> Chris Phillips wrote:
>>>>> The MTU definitely needs to be the same, in my experience.  
>>>>> However, I am somewhat new to MPLS and am very much still in the 
>>>>> learning process.  But, that would be the first thing that I would 
>>>>> change.
>>>>
>>>> I'm in the same boat for L2VPNs.  I have somewhat better knowledge 
>>>> of L3VPNs at this point.  We're just now really diving into L2VPNs.
>>>>
>>>> I did change the MTU and that fixed it.  That presents a design 
>>>> issue for me which I detailed in a self-reply to the list.  I'm now 
>>>> trying to figure out what best practice is for EoMPLS on sub-ints 
>>>> when the sub-int involves customer and infrastructure VLANs.  The 
>>>> best answer may be to not mix them.  Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Justin
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/
>>
>> -- 
>> Chris Phillips
>> Senior IP Engineer & Peering Coordinator
>> WBS Connect
>> cphillips at wbsconnect.com
>> (866) WBS-CONX
>> (720) 259-8361 - direct
>> (303) 968-4383 - mobile
>> www.wbsconnect.com
>> www.wbstoday.com blog
>>
>> Ranked #1 as the "Fastest Growing privately held company in Colorado"
>> - 2008 Denver Business Journal -
>