[j-nsp] VPLS Frustrations (Juniper - Cisco)
Keegan Holley
keegan.holley at sungard.com
Thu Mar 22 16:48:17 EDT 2012
Try changing your encapsulation to flexible ethernet services. It's been a
while since I set this up from scratch, but I've never seen a vpls neighbor
defined only site-id's and site ranges. That may not be your problem
though. Are your CE's tagging? encap vpls only supports untagged packets
from the CE. vlan-vpls or flexible is required to pass dot1q tags. You
should think about doing q-in-q to isolate your topology from the
customers. What does your BGP look like? Both L2VPN and VPLS are actually
BGP signalled so your (MP)BGP config is important too.
2012/3/22 Ben Boyd <ben at sinatranetwork.com>
> A straight l2 circuit wouldn't work because of a switched-network between
> a PE and the CE.
>
> L2VPN wouldn't work because BGP isn't used as MPLS transport mechanism.
>
>
> Updated Setup:
>
> CE switch #1 (untagged/tagged) -------- MX240 (11.4R1.14) -------- P
> router -------- Cisco PE (tagged) -------- Switched Network -------- CE
> switch #2 (untagged/tagged)
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------
> Ben Boyd
> ben at sinatranetwork.com
> http://about.me/benboyd
>
>
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2012, at 11:34 AM, Ben Boyd wrote:
>
> >
> > All,
> >
> > I'm running into VPLS frustrations in an MX. I'd like to create a VPLS
> instance in which a customer can plug in a device on any port in our
> network and we'll pass the traffic no matter what type of traffic it is
> (we're just a wire). For example, they can plug in a switch/router where
> the interface is tagging traffic or not tagging traffic.
> >
> > This particular example is one CE-switch to another CE-Switch, but we'll
> eventually add several additional switches and routers in the same VPLS
> instance.
> >
> > Right now, I am seeing BPDU's received from one CE switch to another CE
> switch, but I'm not seeing any coming back.
> >
> > I'm also not able to ping from CE to CE on any VLAN.
> >
> > Here is the Setup:
> >
> > CE switch #1 (untagged/tagged) -------- MX240 (11.4R1.14) -------- P
> router -------- Cisco PE -------- CE switch #2 (untagged/tagged)
> >
> > CE switch #2 is receiving BPDUs from CE switch #1, however CE switch #1
> isn't receiving BPDU's from CE switch #2
> >
> >
> > Relevant MX240 config:
> > admin at interop-MX240# show interfaces ge-2/1/0
> > mtu 9192;
> > encapsulation ethernet-vpls;
> > unit 0 {
> > family vpls;
> > }
> >
> >
> > admin at interop-MX240# show routing-instances VPLS2001
> > instance-type vpls;
> > vlan-id all;
> > interface ge-2/1/0.0;
> > protocols {
> > vpls {
> > no-tunnel-services;
> > vpls-id 100;
> > mtu 9216;
> > neighbor 172.16.0.11;
> > }
> > }
> >
> > admin at interop-MX240# show protocols layer2-control
> > mac-rewrite {
> > interface ge-2/1/0 {
> > protocol {
> > stp;
> > vtp;
> > cdp;
> > }
> > }
> > }
> >
> > The VPLS VC is up from MX240 to Cisco PE.
> >
> > admin at interop-MX240# run show vpls connections
> > Instance: VPLS2001
> > VPLS-id: 100
> > Neighbor Type St Time last up # Up
> trans
> > 172.16.0.11(vpls-id 100) rmt Up Mar 22 11:13:33 2012
> 1
> > Remote PE: 172.16.0.11, Negotiated control-word: No
> > Incoming label: 262151, Outgoing label: 119
> > Negotiated PW status TLV: No
> > Local interface: lsi.1052423, Status: Up, Encapsulation: ETHERNET
> > Description: Intf - vpls VPLS2001 neighbor 172.16.0.11 vpls-id
> 100
> >
> >
> > Cisco_PE#show mpls l2transport vc
> >
> > Local intf Local circuit Dest address VC ID
> Status
> > ------------- -------------------------- --------------- ----------
> ----------
> > VFI vpls1 VFI 172.16.0.12 100 UP
> >
> >
> > If anyone has some config advice, i'm open to it!
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------
> > Ben Boyd
> > ben at sinatranetwork.com
> > http://about.me/benboyd
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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