Re: MPLS TE Tunnel : Tunnel B/W doubt

Naveen ,

Thnx for the reply ..
Do you mean to suggest some kind of unequal load-balancing across various
TE tunnels .

Between the tunnels ; I can choose using following command :

Router(config-if)#tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute metric

I can set one tunnel as lower metric to be announced over the second tunnel
. and hence play around with this

Is that what u r suggesting ?

Gaurav Madan

On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Naveen <navin.ms_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> What you are seeing is Load balancing across multiple TE tunnels for
> prefixes reachable further down the tunnel. This is an expected behavior
> with "autoroute announce". You can use "auto-bw" to dynamically control the
> TE tunnel Bandwidth after tunnel setup.
>
> Once tunnels are established (using CSPF), IGP considers the Tunnels as
> always 1-hop (and always prefers over any other IGP 1-hop path). You can
> load balance upto 8,16, or 32 TE paths as supported by the platform.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Sonu Khandelwal <sonu.kwl_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> Sonu Khandelwal (
>> sonu.kwl@gmail.com) is not on your Guest List<https://www.boxbe.com/approved-list>| Approve
>> sender <https://www.boxbe.com/anno?tc=10557674166_204049186> | Approve
>> domain <https://www.boxbe.com/anno?tc=10557674166_204049186&dom>
>>
>> on interface it means how much bandwidth can be reserved by RSVP.
>> on tunnel it means, how much bandwidth is required by tunnel.
>>
>> Hope it helps.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sonu
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 11:37 PM, GAURAV MADAN <gauravmadan1177_at_gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > Then what does "rsvp bandwidth <> " on interface does ?
>> > That is also a constraint on interface to establish the tunnel .. right
>> ?
>> >
>> > How do you differentiate between the BW that we specify on interface
>> level
>> > and the one that we specify on interface tunnel ?
>> >
>> > Thnx
>> > Gaurav Madan
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Paul Negron <negron.paul_at_gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > The bandwidth is a constraint. It only says " I need 60K of bandwidth
>> in
>> > > order to establish this tunnel". One tunnel requires 60K and the other
>> > > requires 70K. If the bandwidth is available for both, they will both
>> be
>> > > established. That "bandwidth" constraint has nothing to do with the
>> cost
>> > of
>> > > the tunnel for route selection.
>> > > --
>> > > Paul Negron
>> > > CCIE# 14856 CCSI# 22752
>> > > Senior Technical Instructor
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > From: GAURAV MADAN <gauravmadan1177_at_gmail.com>
>> > > > Reply-To: GAURAV MADAN <gauravmadan1177_at_gmail.com>
>> > > > Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 20:44:46 +0530
>> > > > To: Cisco certification <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>> > > > Subject: MPLS TE Tunnel : Tunnel B/W doubt
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi All
>> > > >
>> > > > I am running in some issue to understand how Tunnel Bandwidth works
>> .
>> > > >
>> > > > Topology
>> > > > ---------
>> > > >
>> > > > R1 R4
>> > > > | |
>> > > > | |
>> > > > R2-----------------R3
>> > > >
>> > > > R1 is head end of tunnel . It has 2 tunnels Tunnel0 and Tunnel 1 as
>> > > follows
>> > > > :
>> > > >
>> > > > R1#sh run int tun 0
>> > > > Building configuration...
>> > > >
>> > > > Current configuration : 284 bytes
>> > > > !
>> > > > interface Tunnel0
>> > > > ip unnumbered Loopback0
>> > > > tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
>> > > > tunnel destination 4.4.4.4
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng priority 7 7
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng bandwidth 70
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 1 dynamic lockdown
>> > > > end
>> > > >
>> > > > R1#sh run int tun 1
>> > > > Building configuration...
>> > > >
>> > > > Current configuration : 284 bytes
>> > > > !
>> > > > interface Tunnel1
>> > > > ip unnumbered Loopback0
>> > > > tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
>> > > > tunnel destination 4.4.4.4
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng priority 7 7
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng bandwidth 60
>> > > > tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 1 dynamic lockdown
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Now ; one tunnel has bandwidth of 70Kbps and other has of 60Kbps .
>> > > > Following is my show ip route ospf output :
>> > > >
>> > > > 4.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
>> > > > O 4.4.4.4 [110/4] via 4.4.4.4, 00:05:52, Tunnel1
>> > > > [110/4] via 4.4.4.4, 00:05:52, Tunnel0
>> > > >
>> > > > I see both entries there ...
>> > > >
>> > > > Is there a reason for this ?
>> > > > Please let me know .. I think that it should be routing via Tunnel 0
>> > > only .
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks
>> > > > Gaurav Madan
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sun Jan 29 2012 - 01:01:43 ART