[c-nsp] MPLS routed pseudowire between ASR9k and 7600 with LAN cards

[Aivars]

I am not sure what that means either. This is just what 7600 showed on
debug.

Targeted LDP is configured and up on both. This was my first thought
too when I saw the message.


 Aivars

>> XCL2 Failed to find session for peer 192.168.0.2, vcid 555
> -not sure what you mean by that please. Do you mean the targeted LDP session
> was not formed?
>  Does the ASR shows that the targeted LDP session is up please?

> adam
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Aivars
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:18 AM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS routed pseudowire between ASR9k and 7600 with LAN
> cards

> Just a little additional information.

> Debug on 7600 shows:

> XCL2 Failed to find session for peer 192.168.0.2, vcid 555

> ASR is running 4.3.0 and 7600 122-33.SRE7a.

> So far I have not succeeded to bring up a working remote L2VPN session on
> ASR (also without L3 interface). Even if it shows up at both ends, it does
> not mean that it is working.


>  Aivars

>> Hi,

>>  

>> There is a need to extend L2 connections from an existing 7600 with 
>> LAN cards to a new ASR9001 and configure IP address on that connection.

>>  

>> If we look for link redundancy and rule out conventional switching and 
>> spanning tree, to my understanding this looks something like "Pseudowire
> Headend".

>>  

>>  

>> ASR9k:

>> l2vpn

>> xconnect group test

>> p2p test

>> interface PW-Ether555

>>  neighbor 192.168.0.1 pw-id 555

>>  

>> interface PW-Ether555

>> mtu 9216

>> vrf MGMT

>> ipv4 address 172.30.2.1 255.255.255.252

>> attach generic-interface-list test

>>  

>> generic-interface-list test

>> interface Bundle-Ether1

>> interface TenGigE0/0/0/1

>>  

>> 7600:

>> interface TenGigabitEthernet3/4.555

>> encapsulation dot1Q 555

>>  xconnect 192.168.0.2 555 encapsulation mpls

>> mtu 9202

>>  

>> The problem here is that ASR thinks that everything is fine:

>>  

>> Group test, XC test, state is up; Interworking none

>> AC: PW-Ether555, state is up

>> Type PW-Ether

>> Interface-list: test

>> Replicate status:

>> Te0/0/0/1: success

>> BE1: success

>> MTU 9202; interworking none

>> Internal label: 16020

>> Statistics:

>> packets: received 0, sent 60

>> bytes: received 0, sent 2532

>> PW: neighbor

>> 192.168.0.1

>> , PW ID 555, state is up ( established )

>> PW class not set, XC ID 0xc0000001

>> Encapsulation MPLS, protocol LDP

>> Source address 172.30.0.2

>> PW type Ethernet, control word disabled, interworking none

>> PW backup disable delay 0 sec

>> Sequencing not set

>>  

>> PW Status TLV in use

>> MPLS Local Remote

>> ------------ ------------------------------ 
>> -----------------------------

>> Label 16021 45

>> Group ID 0x160 0x0

>> Interface PW-Ether555 unknown

>> MTU 9202 9202

>> Control word disabled disabled

>> PW type Ethernet Ethernet

>> VCCV CV type 0x2 0x2

>> (LSP ping verification) (LSP ping verification)

>> VCCV CC type 0x6 0x6

>> (router alert label) (router alert label)

>> (TTL expiry) (TTL expiry)

>> ------------ ------------------------------ 
>> -----------------------------

>> Incoming Status (PW Status TLV):

>> Status code: 0x0 (Up) in Notification message

>> Outgoing Status (PW Status TLV):

>> Status code: 0x0 (Up) in Notification message

>> MIB cpwVcIndex: 3221225473

>> Create time: 19/02/2013 08:51:23 (07:59:29 ago)

>> Last time status changed: 19/02/2013 16:50:00 (00:00:52 ago)

>> Last time PW went down: 19/02/2013 09:05:10 (07:45:42 ago)

>> Statistics:

>> packets: received 0, sent 60

>> bytes: received 0, sent 2532

>>  

>> However at the same time 7600 is unhappy:

>>  

>> BIP-STO1#sh xconnect int te3/4.555 detail

>> 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

>>
> ------+---------------------------------+--+--------------------------------
> -+--

>> DN ac Te3/4.555:555(Eth VLAN) UP mpls 192.168.0.2:555 DN

>> Interworking: ethernet Local VC label 45

>> Remote VC label 16021

>>  

>> What am I missing here? Is this even the right approach to reach the goal?

>>  

>> I succeeded in a similar task where there was HP 5800 at the other end 
>> of L2 circuit. I used bridge domain, VPLS and BVI interface in that 
>> case. Unfortunately VPLS is not an option for 7600 with LAN cards.

>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/