Re: Is there a methodical way to check full reachability?

Some of the things you mention could be pre-configured in your lab, or
not configured properly. Furthermore, there is a whole troubleshooting
section now that deals with exactly these issues...

MPLS is part of the the v4 blueprint. While TE tunnels are not
explicitly there, I was not talking about them, just about MPLS LSPs
in general.

--
Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Community: http://www.ipexpert.com/communities
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 17:33, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> wrote:
> No, I don't...
>
> in the old days, full reachability came before security/ policing/
> whatever. And you needed to make sure you had it ok, usually that you
> nailed down any redistribution issues that were not apparent.
> That is where ping scripts are used, and where I consider
> route table analysis os a better way to do it.
>
> -Carlos
>
> P.S.
> R&S has MPLS tunnels in the lab ?
>
> Marko Milivojevic @ 22/01/2010 14:21 -0300 dixit:
>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 16:57, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> wrote:
>>> Would you please show a simple example where you have routes and
>>> not reachability ? Obviously without ACLs blocking traffic.
>>
>> B - or policy routing in the way
>> B - or missing/wrong MPLS labels
>> B - or CoPP
>> B - or ...
>>
>> You get the idea :-)
>>
>> --
>> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427
>> Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert
>>
>> Mailto: markom_at_ipexpert.com
>> Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
>> Fax: +1.810.454.0130
>> Community: http://www.ipexpert.com/communities
>
> --
> Carlos G Mendioroz B <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> B LW7 EQI B Argentina
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net