[j-nsp] VPLS LM Status?
Marlon Duksa
mduksa at gmail.com
Tue Aug 5 17:52:09 EDT 2008
Great answers. Thanks.
Marlon
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:22 AM, Krasimir Avramski <krasi at smartcom.bg> wrote:
> A typical usage of multiple local sites is multihoming. One site can be
> multihomed another not.
>
> I noticed you complain for this but it should work – just specify site
> preferences in multihomed sites ( although I think bgp selection should fall
> down skipping some steps like lowest IGP metric ….)
>
>
>
> The mesh-groups is notion in regards to split-horizon rules in VPLS.
>
> They are used (9.1) for interoperability between LDP and BGP signaling.
>
> Also will be used is future releases for H-VPLS ( ldp sig) and inter-AS
> VPLS.
>
>
>
> In your setup the "local mesh-groups" (interfaces under site-IDs) should
> forward flooded and learned traffic – working as designed.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Krasi
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* Marlon Duksa [mailto:mduksa at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 05, 2008 8:14 AM
> *To:* Krasimir Avramski
> *Cc:* juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> *Subject:* Re: [j-nsp] VPLS LM Status?
>
>
>
> It works. Thanks.
> Can you please elaborate a bit more what do you mean by local mesh-groups?
> I tried to forward learned traffic as well as flooded from interfaces
> between local sites and interfaces within local sites...traffic was flowing
> in any case.
> Are those mesh groups supposed to supress some traffic? Not quite sure what
> is the purpose of multiple local sites? If I have many interfaces in a
> single site, wouldn't that work as well?
> Thanks,
> marlon
>
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 1:30 AM, Krasimir Avramski <krasi at smartcom.bg>
> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Only one pseudowire is setup between PEs of a VPLS domain.
>
> There are already pseudowires 1-2 and 1-3, so site ID 1 is minimum
> designated in PE for this VPLS domain. At the forwarding plain you should
> not have any problems in communication between interfaces in site 4 to
> local
> interfaces in site 1 and remote site IDs 2 and 3.
> LM, RM states are not considered errors, that is more information for the
> pseudowire selection.
>
> Think of "a site" (VE) as a selection of PE-CE interfaces (local
> mesh-group)
> for a vpls domain.
>
> Also when configuring multihoming specify the site preferences in order PEs
> to solve collisions and choose single forwarder.
>
>
> Regards,
> Krasi
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
> > bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Marlon Duksa
> > Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 1:16 AM
> > To: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [j-nsp] VPLS LM Status?
> >
> > Does anyone know why would I get the LM status (local site ID not minimum
> > designated) on my VPLS connection.
> > I have two sites configured on a single PE in the same VPLS.
> > One site is coming up just fine, but the other is not.
> >
> > The remote side for the 'not up' connection is complaining with the RM
> > status (remote site ID not minimum designated).
> >
> > What does this 'ID not minimun designated' mean?
> > My sites ID are unique withing the VPLS and within the range that is
> > defined
> > for the site-range.
> >
> > This is the config on my local router:
> >
> > admin at mx-re0# show routing-instances
> > vpls {
> > instance-type vpls;
> > interface ge-0/1/1.0;
> > interface ge-8/2/0.0;
> > interface ge-5/3/4.0;
> > route-distinguisher 100:100;
> > vrf-target target:200:200;
> > protocols {
> > vpls {
> > site-range 10;
> > no-tunnel-services;
> > site green {
> > site-identifier 1;
> > interface ge-0/1/1.0;
> > interface ge-8/2/0.0;
> > }
> > site multi {
> > site-identifier 4;
> > interface ge-5/3/4.0;
> > }
> > }
> > }
> > }
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > And this is the status:
> >
> > admin at mx-re0# run show vpls connections
> > Layer-2 VPN connections:
> >
> > Legend for connection status (St)
> > EI -- encapsulation invalid NC -- interface encapsulation not
> > CCC/TCC/VPLS
> > EM -- encapsulation mismatch WE -- interface and instance encaps not
> > same
> > VC-Dn -- Virtual circuit down NP -- interface hardware not present
> > CM -- control-word mismatch -> -- only outbound connection is up
> > CN -- circuit not provisioned <- -- only inbound connection is up
> > OR -- out of range Up -- operational
> > OL -- no outgoing label Dn -- down
> > LD -- local site signaled down CF -- call admission control failure
> > RD -- remote site signaled down SC -- local and remote site ID collision
> > LN -- local site not designated LM -- local site ID not minimum
> > designated
> > RN -- remote site not designated RM -- remote site ID not minimum
> > designated
> > XX -- unknown connection status IL -- no incoming label
> > MM -- MTU mismatch MI -- Mesh-Group ID not availble
> >
> > Legend for interface status
> > Up -- operational
> > Dn -- down
> >
> > Instance: vpls
> > Local site: green (1)
> > connection-site Type St Time last up # Up
> > trans
> > 2 rmt Up Aug 3 22:02:16 2008
> > 1
> > Local interface: lsi.1048578, Status: Up, Encapsulation: VPLS
> > Description: Intf - vpls vpls local site 1 remote site 2
> > Remote PE: 2.2.2.2, Negotiated control-word: No
> > Incoming label: 262154, Outgoing label: 800032
> > 3 rmt Up Aug 3 22:02:16 2008
> > 1
> > Local interface: lsi.1048576, Status: Up, Encapsulation: VPLS
> > Description: Intf - vpls vpls local site 1 remote site 3
> > Remote PE: 3.3.3.3, Negotiated control-word: No
> > Incoming label: 262155, Outgoing label: 800024
> > Local site: multi (4)
> > connection-site Type St Time last up # Up
> > trans
> > 2 rmt LM
> > 3 rmt LM
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Marlon
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
>
>
More information about the juniper-nsp
mailing list