[j-nsp] Too much packet loss during switchover on MPLS network

[Keegan Holley]

Deactivating the interface should remove the IP address which should cause
the IGP to converge immediately.

On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Tighe <matthew.e.tighe at gmail.com>wrote:

> You can *disable *the interface rather than *deactivate *it. That should
> show it as down immediately.
>
> set interface fe-x/y/z disable
> commit
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Gökhan Gümüş <ggumus at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It might make sense...I have been always thinking on it.
> > Which way would be useful to test such behaviour?
> > To disable circuit or?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Gokhan
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Amos Rosenboim <amos at oasis-tech.net
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > As far as I remember deactivating the interface will not take the link
> > > down, so we are relying on igp hold times to detect the failure.
> > > If so, does the 45 seconds make any sense ?
> > > Can you correlate igp adjacency loss to lsp switchover to customer
> pings
> > ?
> > >
> > > Amos
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > On 14 Mar 2011, at 21:55, "Doug Hanks" <dhanks at juniper.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > If it’s VPLS, the customer wouldn’t be using BGP though.  That’s why
> I
> > > mentioned STP.
> > > >
> > > > From: Keegan Holley [mailto:keegan.holley at sungard.com]
> > > > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 12:47 PM
> > > > To: Gökhan Gümüş
> > > > Cc: Doug Hanks; Diogo Montagner; juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Too much packet loss during switchover on MPLS
> > > network
> > > >
> > > > Another to way to check would be to figure out when you start seeing
> > > mac-addresses from the customer in the vpls tables.  That will mean the
> > > network has failed over properly.  Do you know what the customer
> topology
> > > looks like?  They could be waiting for BGP to fail over or something
> else
> > > that inherently slow.  I doubt this is a problem with your mpls config,
> > > especially if you see your lsp switch.  It's hard to guess without
> > knowing
> > > your's or the customer's topology though.
> > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 3:42 PM, Gökhan Gümüş <ggumus at gmail.com
> > <mailto:
> > > ggumus at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > No, they are not using rapid ping, i can confirm it.
> > > >
> > > > I do not agree with Spanning tree issue.
> > > > Just for note, i am just de-activating one circuit via CLI to trigger
> > > transition from primary to secondary.
> > > >
> > > > Gokhan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 2011/3/14 Doug Hanks <dhanks at juniper.net<mailto:dhanks at juniper.net>>
> > > > I'm sure they were using a rapid ping, so it didn't take anywhere
> near
> > 45
> > > seconds.  If they were using a regular ping, however, it maybe a STP
> > issue.
> > > >
> > > > Also are you using pre-signaled LSPs?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:
> > > juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net> [mailto:
> > > juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net<mailto:
> > > juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net>] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
> > > > Sent: Monday, March 14, 2011 11:15 AM
> > > > To: Diogo Montagner
> > > > Cc: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>;
> > > Gökhan Gümüş
> > > > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Too much packet loss during switchover on MPLS
> > > network
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:25 PM, Diogo Montagner
> > > > <diogo.montagner at gmail.com<mailto:diogo.montagner at gmail.com>>wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Do you have FRR enabled on the LSPs ?
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Node protection and link-protection is the same thing as fast
> re-route.
> > > >
> > > > Is it configured correctly though?  You have to configure a secondary
> > > path
> > > > under protocols mpls and then enable it for FRR/node protection.  You
> > > can't
> > > > just enable it and have it work.
> > > > Also, what does the topology look like?  Could you just be waiting
> for
> > > > customer routing/spanning tree?  Even without FRR your lsp's failover
> > at
> > > the
> > > > speed of your IGP when a link is shut down.  None of them take 41
> > > seconds.
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Gökhan Gümüş <ggumus at gmail.com
> > > <mailto:ggumus at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >>> Dear all,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> I have a problem with one of our customer.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Customer has been deployed with VPLS. We are using primary path and
> > > >>> secondary path ( standby ) to handle VPLS traffic between sites.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Within a maintenance window, we made a failover test. Customer was
> > > >> pinging
> > > >>> remote site continuosly and we would like to test how many packets
> > are
> > > >> being
> > > >>> lost during switchover. When i triggered transition from primary to
> > > >>> secondary, customer lost 41 packets during ping test. Then i
> > > implemented
> > > >>> node-link-protection and link protection in case they help but
> > customer
> > > >>> experienced same amount of packet loss during transition.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> My question, is it a normal behaviour? From my perspective it is
> not
> > a
> > > >>> normal behaviour.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Has anybody such an experince?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Thanks and regards,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Gokhan
> > > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > >>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:
> > > juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> > > >>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:
> > > juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> > > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> > > >>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:
> > > juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Matthew Tighe
> matthew.e.tighe at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>