[c-nsp] MPLS TE Load Balancing

Thu Mar 29 22:02:27 EDT 2012

Hi Xu Hu:

I've tried to configure load-share unfortunately it is not supported :(

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#load-share 100
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#interface tunnel-te501
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#load-share
% Incomplete command.
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#load-share 100
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#commit

% Failed to commit one or more configuration items during a pseudo-atomic
operation. All changes made have been reverted. Please issue 'show
configuration failed' from this session to view the errors
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#show configuration failed
Fri Mar 30 00:58:07.275 UTC
!! SEMANTIC ERRORS: This configuration was rejected by
!! the system due to semantic errors. The individual
!! errors with each failed configuration command can be
!! found below.

interface tunnel-te501
 load-share 100
!!% The requested operation is not supported: Feature not supported on this
platform
!
interface tunnel-te502
 load-share 100
!!% The requested operation is not supported: Feature not supported on this
platform
!
end

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show platform
Fri Mar 30 00:59:35.525 UTC
Node            Type                      State            Config State
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
0/RSP0/CPU0     A9K-RSP-4G(Active)        IOS XR RUN       PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/0/CPU0        A9K-2T20GE-B              IOS XR RUN       PWR,NSHUT,MON
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show ver
Fri Mar 30 00:59:41.689 UTC

ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 1.05(20101118:025914) [ASR9K ROMMON],

9K6-413 uptime is 3 weeks, 3 days, 8 hours, 43 minutes
System image file is "bootflash:disk0/asr9k-os-mbi-4.0.3/mbiasr9k-rp.vm"

cisco ASR9K Series (MPC8641D) processor with 4194304K bytes of memory.
MPC8641D processor at 1333MHz, Revision 2.2
ASR-9006 AC Chassis

Rgds.

On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Xu Hu <jstuxuhu0816 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Check the load-share command under the tunnel configuration.
>
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Xu Hu
>
> On 30 Mar, 2012, at 8:43, omar parihuana <omar.parihuana at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show run int tunnel-te 501
> Thu Mar 29 23:38:02.719 UTC
> interface tunnel-te501
>  ipv4 unnumbered Loopback0
>  load-interval 30
>  autoroute announce
>  !autoroute announce
>  destination 10.100.100.3
>  fast-reroute
>  path-option 10 explicit name 413-312
> !
>
> RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show run int tunnel-te 502
> Thu Mar 29 23:38:12.446 UTC
> interface tunnel-te502
>  ipv4 unnumbered Loopback0
>  load-interval 30
>  autoroute announce
>  !autoroute announce
>  destination 10.100.100.2
>  fast-reroute
>  path-option 10 explicit name 413-405
> !
>
> !
> explicit-path name 413-312
>  index 10 next-address strict ipv4 unicast 10.20.4.1
>  index 20 next-address strict ipv4 unicast 10.100.100.3
> !
>
> explicit-path name 413-405
>  index 10 next-address strict ipv4 unicast 10.20.3.1
>  index 20 next-address strict ipv4 unicast 10.100.100.2
> !
>
> if you need aditional outputs let me know...
>
> Thank you!
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:35 PM, Xu Hu <jstuxuhu0816 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Can share your configuration? Recently I was also configuring the MPLS TE
>> in asr9k.
>>
>> Thanks and regards,
>> Xu Hu
>>
>> On 30 Mar, 2012, at 8:28, omar parihuana <omar.parihuana at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Group,
>> >
>> > I'm wondering about a strange behaviour about MPLS TE on ASR9K
>> >
>> > I have two MPLS TE tunnels (with autoroute announce):
>> >
>> > RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show route 10.100.100.7
>> > Thu Mar 29 23:09:49.818 UTC
>> >
>> > Routing entry for 10.100.100.7/32
>> >  Known via "isis BACKBONE", distance 115, metric 140, type level-2
>> >  Installed Mar 29 22:58:29.392 for 00:11:20
>> >  Routing Descriptor Blocks
>> >    10.100.100.2, from 10.100.100.7, via tunnel-te502
>> >      Route metric is 140
>> >    10.100.100.3, from 10.100.100.7, via tunnel-te501
>> >      Route metric is 140
>> >  No advertising protos.
>> > RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#
>> >
>> > In accordance to RIB output I was hopping that traffic to 10.100.100.7
>> be
>> > balanced between both tunnels... however I only see traffic over the
>> first
>> > tunnel...
>> >
>> >
>> > RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show mpls forwarding prefix 10.100.100.7/32detail
>> > Thu Mar 29 23:05:13.320 UTC
>> > Local  Outgoing    Prefix             Outgoing     Next Hop
>> > Bytes
>> > Label  Label       or ID              Interface
>> > Switched
>> > ------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ ---------------
>> > ------------
>> > 16012  16014       10.100.100.7/32    tt502        10.100.100.2
>> > 24438881830
>> >     Updated Mar 29 22:58:29.416
>> >     MAC/Encaps: 14/18, MTU: 9180
>> >     Label Stack (Top -> Bottom): { Imp-Null 16014 }
>> >     Packets Switched: 100987115
>> >
>> >       16018       10.100.100.7/32    tt501        10.100.100.3
>> > 0
>> >     Updated Mar 29 22:58:29.416
>> >     MAC/Encaps: 14/22, MTU: 9180
>> >     Label Stack (Top -> Bottom): { 16020 Imp-Null 16018 }
>> >     Packets Switched: 0
>> >
>> >
>> > What's happening? why not load balancing ? do i need a additional conf
>> on
>> > ASR9K in order to accomplish MPLS TE load balancing?
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you for your answer...
>> >
>> > Rgds.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Omar E.P.T
>> > -----------------
>> > Certified Networking Professionals make better Connections!
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Omar E.P.T
> -----------------
> Certified Networking Professionals make better Connections!
>
>

-- 
Omar E.P.T
-----------------
Certified Networking Professionals make better Connections!