[c-nsp] ME3600 VPLS configuration with L2VPN CLI
Aaron
aaron1 at gvtc.com
Wed Jun 26 13:09:16 EDT 2013
in the so virtual network world we are all in these days, I wonder why you
wanted expected a virtual ac (aka pw) to not bring up an ip interface. :)
anyway, works on 9k, doesn't work on me3600 (at least using the 2 methods I
tried and in that version of ios)
thanks jason
Aaron
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Lixfeld [mailto:jason at lixfeld.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 10:14 AM
To: Aaron
Cc: 'Nick Ryce'; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3600 VPLS configuration with L2VPN CLI
I don't think I'd ever expect a PW to bring up an SVI, but it's an
interesting point. Technically a PW would be like a VLAN on a trunk, which
would qualify as something that would be able to bring an SVI up in a flat
VLAN environment.
On 2013-06-26, at 11:05 AM, "Aaron" <aaron1 at gvtc.com> wrote:
> Slightly on-topic I guess is...
>
> I was trying to get an svi to come up with no local ac but only a
> remote pw attached via xconnect to svi and svi would not come up.
>
> Then I tried to xconnect vfi to svi and then have neighbor under l2
> vfi and svi still wouldn't come up (I think 15.2(4)S1)
>
> Is that not possible to get an svi to come up with only a pw attached
> to it ? ( I moved it all to asr9k and worked fine..... bvi will come
> up within bg:bd even if only pw ac's are used, regardless of whether
> or not there is a local ac phy/subint)
>
> Aaron
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf
> Of Nick Ryce
> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 9:42 AM
> To: Jason Lixfeld; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net NSP
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3600 VPLS configuration with L2VPN CLI
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> Just tested this myself.
>
> Only appears to work if the SVI is created and the member statement
> added there.
>
> Nick
>
> --
> Nick Ryce
>
> Fluency Communications Ltd.
> e. nick at fluency.net.uk
> w. http://fluency.net.uk/
> t. 0845 874 7000
>
>
>
>
>
> On 26/06/2013 02:07, "Jason Lixfeld" <jason at lixfeld.ca> wrote:
>
>> So I'm just trying to understand how VPLS is 'supposed' to work on
>> ME3600s...
>>
>> This seems to work:
>>
>> !
>> interface GigabitEthernet0/3
>> description Facing CE
>> switchport trunk allowed vlan none
>> switchport mode trunk
>> logging event link-status
>> no cdp enable
>> service instance 1 ethernet
>> encapsulation dot1q 4013
>> rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
>> !
>> !
>> bridge-domain 4013
>> member GigabitEthernet0/3 service-instance 1 !
>> interface Vlan4013
>> vrf forwarding management
>> no ip address
>> member vfi management
>> !
>>
>> #show l2vpn vfi name management
>> Legend: RT=Route-target, S=Split-horizon, Y=Yes, N=No
>>
>> VFI name: management, state: up, type: multipoint, signaling: BGP VPN
>> ID: 4013, VE-ID: 10129, VE-SIZE: 10
>> RD: 21949:2194904013, RT: 21949:4013, 21949:2194904013 Bridge-Domain
>> 4013 attachment circuits:
>> Vlan4013
>> Pseudo-port interface: pseudowire100036
>> Interface Peer Address VE-ID Local Label Remote Label S
>> pseudowire100037 72.15.50.33 10033 299 354 Y
>>
>> However this does not:
>>
>> !
>> interface GigabitEthernet0/3
>> description Facing CE
>> switchport trunk allowed vlan none
>> switchport mode trunk
>> logging event link-status
>> no cdp enable
>> service instance 1 ethernet
>> encapsulation dot1q 4013
>> rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
>> !
>> !
>> bridge-domain 4013
>> member GigabitEthernet0/3 service-instance 1 member vfi management !
>>
>> #show l2vpn vfi name management
>> Legend: RT=Route-target, S=Split-horizon, Y=Yes, N=No
>>
>> VFI name: management, state: down, type: multipoint, signaling: BGP
>> VPN ID: 4013, VE-ID: 10129, VE-SIZE: 10
>> RD: 21949:2194904013, RT: 21949:4013, 21949:2194904013 Bridge-Domain
>> 4013 attachment circuits:
>> Pseudo-port interface: pseudowire100036
>> Interface Peer Address VE-ID Local Label Remote Label S
>> pseudowire100037 72.15.50.33 10033 299 354 Y
>>
>> So even though in the latter example, vfi management is a member of
>> bridge-domain 4013, it can't seem to find the attachment circuit. I
>> get that the AC wouldn't be Vlan4013, but I'd sorta expect it to know
>> that it's Gi0/3 si 1. I'm assuming that since we can now map a vfi
>> to a bridge-domain, an SVI is no longer required, unless the VPLS
>> instance is routed VPLS; we'd need somewhere to apply the IP and
>> mask. Is this an incorrect assumption or is something not working
>> that really should be working?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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