[c-nsp] MPLS routed pseudowire between ASR9k and 7600 with LAN cards
Shane Heupel
sheupel at twlakes.coop
Tue Feb 26 08:20:08 EST 2013
I have almost this same configuration working between a 7600 with ES+ cards and an ASR9K. It took me forever to get this working but I finally found a TAC engineer who knew what he was doing. We ended up having to put a static route in the ASR9K pointing to the terminating IP of the 7600. LDP would not come up until we did this even though everything looked fine on the 7600. I can share configs if you would like.
Thanks,
Shane
-----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 3:51 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS routed pseudowire between ASR9k and 7600 with LAN cards
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/
_______________________________________________
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/
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list