[c-nsp] Transporting customer vlan id over pw

[Aaron]

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/routers/asr-9000-series-aggregatio
n-services-routers/116453-technote-ios-xr-l2vpn-00.html

Section 3.2

Mentions "Some VLAN tags are transported over the PW, depending on the
configuration and the PW type."

Mentions something about AC not having rewrite ingress and thus retaining
the vlan tags...

"
RP/0/RSP1/CPU0:router2#sh run int gig 0/0/0/1.2
Wed May  1 13:56:07.668 CEST
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1.2 l2transport
 encapsulation dot1q 2

Because there is no rewrite ingress pop command, the incoming VLAN tag 2 is
transported over the PW. See Type 4 and 5 PWs for details.
"

The also further mention when incoming tag rcv'd on AC isn't pop'ed MTU of
course will reflect that additional 4 byte tag...

"
In this configuration, note that:

The maximum transmission unit (MTU) of the AC is 1504 because the incoming
tag on the AC is not popped. The MTU must match on each side, or the PW does
not come up.
"

Section 3.2.3 Type 4 and Type 5 PWs - is also very interesting


Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Cydon Satyr
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:28 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Transporting customer vlan id over pw

Hello.

In all examples that show configuring VPWS vc type 5 on ASR9000,
configuration goes something like this (on both ends):


interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2.100 l2transport  encapsulation dot1q 10
rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric

l2vpn
 xconnect group Cisco-Live
  p2p xc-sample-1
   interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2.100
   neighbor 102.102.102.102 pw-id 111


What if I want to save this service delimiting vlan id over pw?
Would the similar configuration, without normalizing tags be possible?

interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2.100 l2transport  encapsulation dot1q 10

l2vpn
 xconnect group Cisco-Live
  p2p xc-sample-1
   interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2.100
   neighbor 102.102.102.102 pw-id 111


Would this be signaled as vc type 4 ?

And is this possible on 7600 as well?


Hopefully you can shed some light on this please.

Regards
_______________________________________________
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/