[c-nsp] H-VPLS BGP autodiscovery

[Anrey Teslenko]

Yes you are right - the cost of the  SIP interface is lower than the Lan
card
Also, I already have a "mpls ldp router-id Loopback0", which is used  for
other purposes . AFAIK only one loopback can participate in ldp interaction.

If I have correctly understood you are offering to implement  one more
"normal" igp-related mpls+ip topology. How it is possibly?


2010/6/15 <tkapela at gmail.com>

> You will need to adjust igp cost so that your signaling/sourcing PE router
> issues/sends tldp via the sip-based interface towards the far-end vpls
> speakers' loopback address. It would seem that your device is picking a link
> that's lower cost (via the 10 gig card) which cannot allocate labels for
> vpls vfi vc's.
>
> You may also want to assign and deploy a second set of loopbacks on your
> devices, specifically for use in signaling (and costing/adjusting via an igp
> or ibgp) vpls vfi setup. A different target (loopback) will permit you to
> run a "normal" igp-related mpls+ip topology alongside a slightly different
> one, with tweaks you apply so that tldp sessions for vfis take different
> links/egress paths.
>
> The pfc3 will not (read: cannot) allocate labels which terminate to a local
> vfi *and* which have a P-facing link on a LAN card. The pfc3 only supports
> allocating labels for vfi's that have p-facing links which terminate on
> sip+spa, ES, or OSM+ line cards, and of course p2p eompls vc's. The pfc3
> will be fine with acting as a P device for both lan cards and wan cards. The
> issue you are seeing occurs only when the device is acting as a vfi PE and
> when you wish to run P-facing links on lan ports.
>
> -Tk
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anrey Teslenko <teslenko.andrey at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:43:56
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] H-VPLS BGP autodiscovery
>
> Whether somebody can answer my question?
> Help me please, If you had the same problem
>
> 2010/6/11 Anrey Teslenko <teslenko.andrey at gmail.com>
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > Does anyone have the experience in configuration of H-VPLS, using BGP as
> > discovery mechanism?
> >
> > I try to implement this in my network. Everything works fine, but there
> are
> > some problems.
> > I  tune H-VPLS on cisco 7600 series with SIP-400 as uplink and downlink
> > interfaces.
> > I have trouble, when router has two uplinks interfaces - the first on Sip
> > 400 and the second on a LAN card
> > Detailed output is as follows for my VFI
> >
> > Local interface: VFI test VFI up
> >   MPLS VC type is VFI, interworking type is Ethernet
> >   Destination address: xx.xx.xx.xx, VC ID: 500, VC status: up
> >     Output interface: none, imposed label stack {302 295}
> >     Preferred path: not configured
> >     Default path: active
> >     Next hop: Invalid ADDR
> >
> > As result LDP signaling works fine, BGP autodiscovery works fine, however
> > pseudo wire  has not found outgoing interface
> > Manual configuration of VFI allows to apply pseudoware-class with
> > preferred-path, but this configuration is poorly scalable
> > However in autodiscovery mode I  couldn't apply preferred-path (Cisco
> say:
> > "Tunnel selection is not supported with autodiscovered neighbors.")
> >
> > So my question is: How to properly select output interface (SIP 400
> instead
> > WS-X6704-10GE), configuring of H-VPLS and using BGP autodiscovery?
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>