[c-nsp] VFI LDP transport signaled down (ME3600x)

Waris Sagheer (waris) waris at cisco.com
Thu May 10 11:10:03 EDT 2012


Please open a SR and I'll have someone to work with the TAC engineer.

Regards,
Waris


-----Original Message-----
From: Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim [mailto:ihsan.junaidi at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:07 AM
To: Waris Sagheer (waris)
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VFI LDP transport signaled down (ME3600x)

I did.

Apart from the service policies on the SVI, there's no difference.

Do you prefer to take this offline with the account team? I'm OK both
ways.

ihsan

On May 10, 2012, at 10:52 PM, Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote:

> Did you get a chance to look at the configuration which I have sent in

> my earlier email?
> Are there any gaps?
> 
> Regards,
> Waris
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim [mailto:ihsan.junaidi at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 7:42 AM
> To: Waris Sagheer (waris)
> Cc: Arie Vayner (avayner); cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VFI LDP transport signaled down (ME3600x)
> 
> Waris,
> 
> The attachment circuit is already configured as per the start of the 
> thread.
> 
> es-103-glsfb#sh vfi
> Legend: RT=Route-target, S=Split-horizon, Y=Yes, N=No
> 
> VFI name: ME002555, state: up, type: multipoint signaling: LDP  VPN 
> ID: 116, VPLS-ID: 9930:116
>  RD: 9930:116, RT: 9930:116
>  Bridge-Domain 116 attachment circuits:
>    Vlan116
>  Neighbors connected via pseudowires:
>  Peer Address     VC ID        Discovered Router ID    S
>  200.28.9.146     116          200.28.0.120            Y
> 
> es-03-akhmw#sh vfi
> Legend: RT=Route-target, S=Split-horizon, Y=Yes, N=No
> 
> VFI name: ME002617, state: up, type: multipoint signaling: LDP  VPN 
> ID: 116, VPLS-ID: 9930:116
>  RD: 9930:116, RT: 9930:116
>  Bridge-Domain 116 attachment circuits:
>    Vlan116
>  Neighbors connected via pseudowires:
>  Peer Address     VC ID        Discovered Router ID    S
>  200.28.2.242     116          200.28.0.15             Y
> 
> ihsan
> 
> On May 10, 2012, at 3:12 PM, Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote:
> 
>> You need to have attachment circuit up for flat VPLS with 
>> autodiscovery to work.
>> Attached is the working configuration.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Waris
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net 
>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Arie Vayner
>> (avayner)
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 3:44 PM
>> To: Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VFI LDP transport signaled down (ME3600x)
>> 
>> Ihsan,
>> 
>> On which IOS version are you?
>> This should work on 15.2S
>> 
>> Arie
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net 
>> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ihsan Junaidi

>> Ibrahim
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2012 07:37
>> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> Subject: [c-nsp] VFI LDP transport signaled down (ME3600x)
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> My topology as follows:
>> 
>> PE1--P1--P2--P3--P4--P5--PE2
>> 
>> PE1 lo0 - 200.28.0.15 (15.2(2)S) loader 12.2(52r)EY1
>> PE2 lo0 - 200.28.0.120 (15.2(2)S) loader 12.2(52r)EY2
>> 
>> Are there specific nuances for an LDP signaled transport for EoMPLS 
>> and VPLS in the Whales platform?
>> 
>> An xconnect from PE1 to PE2 is signaled successfully however a VPLS 
>> instance based on BGP autodiscovery (manual VPLS works) is unable to 
>> bring up the LDP l2transport signal although the VFI is signaled up.
>> 
>> EoMPLS
>> ----
>> es-103-glsfb#sh xconnect peer 200.28.0.120 vc 5070         
>> Legend:    XC ST=Xconnect State  S1=Segment1 State  S2=Segment2 State
>> UP=Up       DN=Down            AD=Admin Down      IA=Inactive
>> SB=Standby  HS=Hot Standby     RV=Recovering      NH=No Hardware
>> 
>> XC ST  Segment 1                         S1 Segment 2
>> S2
>> ------+---------------------------------+--+-------------------------
>> ------+---------------------------------+--+-
>> ------+---------------------------------+--+--
>> -----+--
>> UP pri   ac Gi0/19:1(Ethernet)           UP mpls 200.28.0.120:5070
>> UP
>> 
>> es-103-glsfb#sh mpls l2transport vc 5070 detail Local interface: 
>> Gi0/19 up, line protocol up, Ethernet:1 up  Destination address: 
>> 200.28.0.120, VC ID: 5070, VC status: up
>>   Output interface: Te0/2, imposed label stack {298 16}
>>   Preferred path: not configured  
>>   Default path: active
>>   Next hop: 200.28.2.242
>> Create time: 02:10:43, last status change time: 02:08:57  Signaling
>> protocol: LDP, peer 200.28.0.120:0 up
>>   Targeted Hello: 200.28.0.15(LDP Id) -> 200.28.0.120, LDP is UP
>>   Status TLV support (local/remote)   : enabled/supported
>>     LDP route watch                   : disabled
>>     Label/status state machine        : established, LruRru
>>     Last local dataplane   status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last BFD dataplane     status rcvd: Not sent
>>     Last BFD peer monitor  status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last local AC  circuit status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last local AC  circuit status sent: No fault
>>     Last local LDP TLV     status sent: No fault
>>     Last remote LDP TLV    status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last remote LDP ADJ    status rcvd: No fault
>>   MPLS VC labels: local 17, remote 16 
>>   Group ID: local 0, remote 0
>>   MTU: local 9178, remote 9178
>>   Remote interface description: 
>> Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled  Control Word: On
>> (configured: autosense)
>> Dataplane:
>>   SSM segment/switch IDs: 45083/8194 (used), PWID: 2  VC statistics:
>>   transit packet totals: receive 24, send 21
>>   transit byte totals:   receive 2064, send 1344
>>   transit packet drops:  receive 0, seq error 0, send 0
>> 
>> VPLS
>> ----
>> es-103-glsfb#sh vfi
>> Legend: RT=Route-target, S=Split-horizon, Y=Yes, N=No
>> 
>> VFI name: ME002555, state: up, type: multipoint signaling: LDP  VPN
>> ID: 116, VPLS-ID: 9930:116
>> RD: 9930:116, RT: 9930:116
>> Bridge-Domain 116 attachment circuits:
>>   Vlan116
>> Neighbors connected via pseudowires:
>> Peer Address     VC ID        Discovered Router ID    S
>> 200.28.9.146     116          200.28.0.120            Y
>> 
>> es-103-glsfb#sh mpls l2transport vc 116 detail Local interface: VFI
>> ME002555 vfi up
>> Interworking type is Ethernet
>> Destination address: 200.28.0.120, VC ID: 116, VC status: down
>>   Last error: Local access circuit is not ready for label advertise 
>> Next hop PE address: 200.28.9.146
>>   Output interface: none, imposed label stack {}
>>   Preferred path: not configured  
>>   Default path: no route
>>   No adjacency
>> Create time: 02:07:55, last status change time: 02:07:55  Signaling
>> protocol: LDP, peer unknown
>>   Targeted Hello: 200.28.0.15(LDP Id) -> 200.28.9.146, LDP is DOWN, 
>> no binding
>>   Status TLV support (local/remote)   : enabled/None (no remote
>> binding)
>>     LDP route watch                   : disabled
>>     Label/status state machine        : local standby, AC-ready,
>> LnuRnd
>>     Last local dataplane   status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last BFD dataplane     status rcvd: Not sent
>>     Last BFD peer monitor  status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last local AC  circuit status rcvd: No fault
>>     Last local AC  circuit status sent: Not sent
>>     Last local LDP TLV     status sent: None
>>     Last remote LDP TLV    status rcvd: None (no remote binding)
>>     Last remote LDP ADJ    status rcvd: None (no remote binding)
>>   MPLS VC labels: local 23, remote unassigned 
>>   AGI: type 1, len 8, 000A 26CA 0000 0074
>>   Local AII: type 1, len 4, DF1C 000F (200.28.0.15)
>>   Remote AII: type 1, len 4, DF1C 0078 (200.28.0.120)
>>   Group ID: local n/a, remote unknown
>>   MTU: local 9178, remote unknown
>>   Remote interface description: 
>> Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled  Control Word: On
>> (configured: autosense)
>> Dataplane:
>>   SSM segment/switch IDs: 0/0 (used), PWID: 14  VC statistics:
>>   transit packet totals: receive 0, send 0
>>   transit byte totals:   receive 0, send 0
>>   transit packet drops:  receive 0, seq error 0, send 0
>> 
>> I'm getting the account team into the loop but if anyone has 
>> encountered this scenario before and managed to find the answer, that

>> would be most helpful.
>> 
>> ihsan
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>> <VPLS_Auto Discovery Testing between Whales_v1.0.docx>
> 




More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list