Re: VLAN-based EoMPLS

 1 * * *

From: karthik thatikonda
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 6:28 PM
To: Shaughn Smith
Cc: Manaf Al Oqlah ; srinivas pv ; Elias Chari ; Group Study
Subject: Re: VLAN-based EoMPLS

Can you do a traceroute on CE01 and see where it is stopping?.

Regards,

Karthik.

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:39 AM, Shaughn Smith <maniac.smg_at_gmail.com> wrote:

  Did you reload the devices. Had the same issue once and a reload sorted it.

  CCIE # 23962 (SP)

  Sent from my iPhone 4

  On 27 Oct 2010, at 4:17 PM, "Manaf Al Oqlah" <manafo_at_hotmail.com> wrote:

> yes received this debugging messages after putting deb ip icmp or deb ip
packets
>
> CE01#debug ip icmp
> CE01#debug ip packet
> CE01#ping 192.168.0.2
>
> Type escape sequence to abort.
> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.168.0.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
>
> *Mar 2 01:50:02.690: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2
(Vlan100), routed via RIB
> *Mar 2 01:50:02.690: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, sending
> *Mar 2 01:50:02.690: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, output feature, Check hwidb(63), rtype 1, forus FALSE, sendself
FALSE, mtu 0
> *Mar 2 01:50:02.699: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, encapsulation failed.
> *Mar 2 01:50:04.695: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2
(Vlan100), routed via RIB
> *Mar 2 01:50:04.695: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, sending
> *Mar 2 01:50:04.695: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, output feature, Check hwidb(63), rtype 1, forus FALSE, sendself
FALSE, mtu 0
> *Mar 2 01:50:04.695: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, encapsulation failed.
> *Mar 2 01:50:06.700: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2
(Vlan100), routed via RIB
> *Mar 2 01:50:06.700: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, sending
> *Mar 2 01:50:06.700: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, output feature, Check hwidb(63), rtype 1, forus FALSE, sendself
FALSE, mtu 0
> *Mar 2 01:50:06.700: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, encapsulation failed.
> *Mar 2 01:50:08.705: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2
(Vlan100), routed via RIB
> *Mar 2 01:50:08.705: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, sending
> *Mar 2 01:50:08.705: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, output feature, Check hwidb(63), rtype 1, forus FALSE, sendself
FALSE, mtu 0
> *Mar 2 01:50:08.705: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, encapsulation failed.
> *Mar 2 01:50:10.710: IP: tableid=0, s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2
(Vlan100), routed via RIB
> *Mar 2 01:50:10.710: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, sending
> *Mar 2 01:50:10.710: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, output feature, Check hwidb(63), rtype 1, forus FALSE, sendself
FALSE, mtu 0
> *Mar 2 01:50:10.710: IP: s=192.168.0.1 (local), d=192.168.0.2 (Vlan100),
len 100, encapsulation failed.
> Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
> CE01#
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "srinivas pv" <vsrinivas.paturi_at_gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 5:11 PM
> To: "Manaf Al Oqlah" <manafo_at_hotmail.com>
> Cc: "Elias Chari" <elias.chari_at_gmail.com>; "Group Study"
<ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Subject: Re: VLAN-based EoMPLS
>
>> These outputs looks fine.
>>
>> Did you get 'deb ip icmp' and 'deb ip pack' on both CEs?
>>
>> This may give some idea.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Srinivas
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Manaf Al Oqlah <manafo_at_hotmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>>> here you go:
>>>
>>> PE01#sh mpls forwarding-table
>>> Local Outgoing Prefix Bytes Label Outgoing Next
Hop
>>>
>>> Label Label or VC or Tunnel Id Switched interface
>>>
>>> 17 Pop Label 2.2.2.2/32 0 Gi1/1/1
>>> 10.0.0.2
>>> 18 No Label l2ckt(100) 0 Vl100 point2point
>>>
>>>
>>> PE01#sh mpls forwarding-table detail
>>> Local Outgoing Prefix Bytes Label Outgoing Next
Hop
>>>
>>> Label Label or VC or Tunnel Id Switched interface
>>>
>>> 17 Pop Label 2.2.2.2/32 0 Gi1/1/1
>>> 10.0.0.2
>>> MAC/Encaps=14/14, MRU=1504, Label Stack{}
>>> 002334947D42001DE63D1F428847
>>> No output feature configured
>>> 18 No Label l2ckt(100) 0 Vl100 point2point
>>>
>>> MAC/Encaps=0/0, MRU=0, Label Stack{}
>>> No output feature configured
>>>
>>> *From:* Elias Chari <elias.chari_at_gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 27, 2010 5:05 PM
>>> *To:* srinivas pv <vsrinivas.paturi_at_gmail.com>
>>> *Cc:* Manaf Al Oqlah <manafo_at_hotmail.com> ; Group
Study<ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: VLAN-based EoMPLS
>>>
>>> you are probably right and it looks right based on the fact that PEs
are
>>> connected back to back. But I am curious about the fact that on a 7200
>>> platform the command also displays the Tunnel label: imp-null, see
output
>>> below, whilst on the ME3750 it does not. I wonder, is this because this
is
>>> how the me3750 displays the output of the command or is it because the
>>> implicit-null is not there?
>>>
>>> Manaf, I would apprecuate it if you send the output of: sh mpls
>>> forwarding-table, it will help me understand a bit better the me3750.
>>>
>>> This is what you get on the 7200
>>>
>>> Rack1R1#sh mpls forwarding-table
>>> Local Outgoing Prefix Bytes Label Outgoing Next
Hop
>>> Label Label or VC or Tunnel Id Switched interface
>>> 19 Pop Label 2.2.2.2/32 0 Se2/2
>>> point2point
>>> 23 No Label l2ckt(111) 860 none point2point
>>>
>>> Rack1R1#sh mpls l2transport vc detail
>>> Local interface: Fa0/0 up, line protocol up, Ethernet up
>>> Destination address: 2.2.2.2, VC ID: 111, VC status: up
>>> Output interface: Se2/2, imposed label stack {23}
>>> Preferred path: not configured
>>> Default path: active
>>> Tunnel label: imp-null, next hop point2point
>>> Create time: 00:19:56, last status change time: 00:19:05
>>> Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 2.2.2.2:0 up
>>> MPLS VC labels: local 23, remote 23
>>> Group ID: local 0, remote 0
>>> MTU: local 1500, remote 1500
>>> Remote interface description:
>>> Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled
>>> VC statistics:
>>> packet totals: receive 26, send 25
>>> byte totals: receive 7206, send 7144
>>> packet drops: receive 0, send 0
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 October 2010 14:20, srinivas pv <vsrinivas.paturi_at_gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since PEs are connected back-to-back, I do not think any issues with
LDP
>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> Also VC labels are setup properly.
>>>>
>>>> On PE1:
>>>> > packet totals: receive 0, send 5 <<<<< receive counters not
>>>> incrementing
>>>>
>>>> > byte totals: receive 0, send 630
>>>> > packet drops: receive 0, send 0
>>>>
>>>> On PE2:
>>>> > VC statistics:
>>>> > packet totals: receive 5, send 0 <<<<< send counters not
>>>> incrementing
>>>>
>>>> > byte totals: receive 540, send 0
>>>> > packet drops: receive 0, send 0
>>>>
>>>> You may need to enable 'deb ip icmp' and 'deb ip pack' on CEs and may
get
>>>> some ideas.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Srinivas
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:42 PM, Elias Chari
<elias.chari_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> check to make sure LDP (not targeted) works ok and that you have a
label
>>>>> to
>>>>> reach the remote PE loopback address.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 October 2010 13:24, Manaf Al Oqlah <manafo_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > ########### PE01 ###########
>>>>> >
>>>>> > PE01#sh mpls l2transport vc detail
>>>>> > Local interface: Vl100 up, line protocol up, Eth VLAN 100 up
>>>>> > Interworking type is Ethernet
>>>>> > Destination address: 2.2.2.2, VC ID: 100, VC status: up
>>>>> > Output interface: Gi1/1/1, imposed label stack {18}
>>>>> > Preferred path: not configured
>>>>> > Default path: active
>>>>> > Next hop: 10.0.0.2
>>>>> > Create time: 00:22:03, last status change time: 00:07:53
>>>>> > Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 2.2.2.2:0 up
>>>>> > Targeted Hello: 1.1.1.1(LDP Id) -> 2.2.2.2
>>>>> > Status TLV support (local/remote) : enabled/not supported
>>>>> > Label/status state machine : established, LruRru
>>>>> > Last local dataplane status rcvd: no fault
>>>>> > Last local SSS circuit status rcvd: no fault
>>>>> > Last local SSS circuit status sent: no fault
>>>>> > Last local LDP TLV status sent: no fault
>>>>> > Last remote LDP TLV status rcvd: not sent
>>>>> > MPLS VC labels: local 20, remote 18
>>>>> > Group ID: local 0, remote 0
>>>>> > MTU: local 1900, remote 1900
>>>>> > Remote interface description:
>>>>> > Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled
>>>>> > VC statistics:
>>>>> > packet totals: receive 0, send 5
>>>>> > byte totals: receive 0, send 630
>>>>> > packet drops: receive 0, send 0
>>>>> >
>>>>> > PE01#sh run int g1/1/2
>>>>> > Building configuration...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Current configuration : 128 bytes
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > interface GigabitEthernet1/1/2
>>>>> > description To CE01
>>>>> > switchport access vlan 100
>>>>> > switchport mode access
>>>>> > speed auto 1000
>>>>> > end
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ###### PE02 ############
>>>>> >
>>>>> > PE02#sh mpls l2transport vc detail
>>>>> > Local interface: Vl100 up, line protocol up, Eth VLAN 100 up
>>>>> > Interworking type is Ethernet
>>>>> > Destination address: 1.1.1.1, VC ID: 100, VC status: up
>>>>> > Output interface: Gi1/1/1, imposed label stack {20}
>>>>> > Preferred path: not configured
>>>>> > Default path: active
>>>>> > Next hop: 10.0.0.1
>>>>> > Create time: 00:21:35, last status change time: 00:09:38
>>>>> > Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 1.1.1.1:0 up
>>>>> > Targeted Hello: 2.2.2.2(LDP Id) -> 1.1.1.1
>>>>> > Status TLV support (local/remote) : enabled/not supported
>>>>> > Label/status state machine : established, LruRru
>>>>> > Last local dataplane status rcvd: no fault
>>>>> > Last local SSS circuit status rcvd: no fault
>>>>> > Last local SSS circuit status sent: no fault
>>>>> > Last local LDP TLV status sent: no fault
>>>>> > Last remote LDP TLV status rcvd: not sent
>>>>> > MPLS VC labels: local 18, remote 20
>>>>> > Group ID: local 0, remote 0
>>>>> > MTU: local 1900, remote 1900
>>>>> > Remote interface description:
>>>>> > Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled
>>>>> > VC statistics:
>>>>> > packet totals: receive 5, send 0
>>>>> > byte totals: receive 540, send 0
>>>>> > packet drops: receive 0, send 0
>>>>> >
>>>>> > PE02#sh run int g1/1/2
>>>>> > Building configuration...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Current configuration : 128 bytes
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > interface GigabitEthernet1/1/2
>>>>> > description to CE01
>>>>> > switchport access vlan 100
>>>>> > switchport mode access
>>>>> > speed auto 1000
>>>>> > end
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ########### CE01 ############
>>>>> >
>>>>> > CE01#sh run int g1/0/25
>>>>> > interface GigabitEthernet1/0/25
>>>>> > description to PE01
>>>>> > switchport access vlan 100
>>>>> > switchport mode access
>>>>> > end
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > CE01#sh run int vlan 100
>>>>> > interface Vlan100
>>>>> > ip address 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ######### CE02 ###########
>>>>> >
>>>>> > CE02#sh run int g1/1/1
>>>>> > interface GigabitEthernet1/1/1
>>>>> > description to PE02
>>>>> > switchport access vlan 100
>>>>> > switchport mode access
>>>>> > speed auto 1000
>>>>> > end
>>>>> >
>>>>> > CE02#sh run int vlan 100
>>>>> > interface Vlan100
>>>>> > ip address 192.168.0.2 255.255.255.0
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > From: srinivas pv
>>>>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 2:42 PM
>>>>> > To: Manaf Al Oqlah
>>>>> > Cc: Group Study
>>>>> > Subject: Re: VLAN-based EoMPLS
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Could you give following details
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On both PEs:
>>>>> > show mpls l2 vc detail
>>>>> > sh run int <int connected to CE>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On both CEs:
>>>>> > sh run int <int connected to PE>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Thanks,
>>>>> > Srinivas
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Manaf Al Oqlah
<manafo_at_hotmail.com>
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Hi,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have established an EoMPLS circuit on ME3750 switches as below.
>>>>> > everything
>>>>> > seems to be working fine as my virtual circuit is UP
>>>>> > but my problem is that I cant ping IP address CE02 from CE01
>>>>> >
>>>>> > PC01---CE01---PE01---PE02---CE02---PC02
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have applied the following configuration on PE01 & PE02 ES ports
>>>>> >
>>>>> > interface loopback 0
>>>>> > ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.255
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > interface GigabitEthernet1/1/1
>>>>> > description to PE02
>>>>> > ip address 10.0.0.1 255.255.255.252
>>>>> > mpls ip
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > interface GigabitEthernet1/1/2
>>>>> > description to CE01
>>>>> > switchport mode access
>>>>> > switchport access vlan 100
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > vlan 100
>>>>> > !
>>>>> > interface vlan 100
>>>>> > xconnect 2.2.2.2 100 encapsulation mpls
>>>>> >
>>>>> > where could me my problem!
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Regards,
>>>>> > Manaf Al Oqlah
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>>
Received on Thu Oct 28 2010 - 09:25:22 ART