[c-nsp] ip vrf autoclassify source - loss of connectivity to hosts

Tassos Chatzithomaoglou achatz at forthnet.gr
Thu Jan 25 01:33:03 EST 2018


We use "ip vrf receive" on physical subinterfaces.
Why do you need "ip vrf receive" per subscriber session on the LNS?

On our LNS (ASR1001 and ASR1006) we use "Cisco-Avpair = "lcp:interface-config=ip vrf forwarding VRF1", but that is supposed to only decrease the scalability in terms of memory/sessions. It works fine otherwise and since our LNS is not fully utilized, scalability isn't a concern at this time.
You can always use the new "Cisco-AVpair = "ip:vrf-id=VRF1" to avoid the above issue.

--
Tassos

James Bensley wrote on 24/1/18 12:07:
> On 24 January 2018 at 09:49, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou <achatz at forthnet.gr> wrote:
>> We're using "vrf receive" without any apparent issues on ASR1001
>> (15.4(3)S2).
>>
>> --
>> Tassos
>
> Hi Tassos,
>
> That is interesting.
>
> In order for us to use "vrf receive" my understanding is that we would
> need to use the legacy style Cisco AV-Pairs:
> "lcp:interface-config#1=ip vrf receive VRF1". These "lcp" style
> AV-pairs are deprecated as far as I know. This is because they trigger
> a full VAI interface to be created on the LNS whereas the ASR1000
> series likes to use sub-interfaces for the subscriber session
> termination.
>
> Do you use the lcp style AVPairs to use "vrf receive" ?
>
> Cheers,
> James.
> _______________________________________________
> 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