Hi,
Try to enable LDP on the loopbacks on PE1, P1 and PE2 and you will have
FECs from PE1 to PE2 via LDP tunneled in both RSVP LSPs.
If I understand you correctly this what your trying to accomplish.
HTH
Ivan,
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 09:24, vaibhava varma <svaibh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Mark
>
> Thanks for the help so far..I tried to use "ldp-tunneling" under RSVP
> TEs from PE-P to P-PE but it does not works as I do not have LDP
> enabled anywhere to tunnel it via RSVP..
>
> My setup is as below:
>
> CE1-PE1--RSVP-LSP1--P1--RSVP-LSP2--PE2--CE2
>
> How can I make the traffic flow from CE1 to CE2 in the MPLS VPN under
> this setup..I am really confused on this and not getting any
> solution..I am seeing all the routes and required lables for CE2
> routes at PE1 but no traffic flow is happening
>
> lab@edge1.pop1# run show route table CE1A.inet.0 172.16.251.1 extensive
>
> CE1A.inet.0: 6 destinations, 8 routes (6 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> 172.16.251.1/32 (2 entries, 1 announced)
> TSI:
> KRT in-kernel 172.16.251.1/32 -> {indirect(131071)}
> Page 0 idx 1 Type 1 val 8f0d594
> Nexthop: Self
> AS path: [64513] 64513 I
> Communities: target:64513:100
> Path 172.16.251.1 from 10.0.2.1 Vector len 4. Val: 1
> *BGP Preference: 170/-101
> Route Distinguisher: 64513:1
> Next hop type: Indirect
> Next-hop reference count: 10
> Source: 10.0.2.1
> Next hop type: Router, Next hop index: 131070
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0, selected
> Label operation: Push 16
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
> Label operation: Push 16
> Protocol next hop: 10.0.6.1
> Push 16
> Indirect next hop: 8ffc000 131071
> State: <Secondary Active Int Ext>
> Local AS: 64513 Peer AS: 64513
> Age: 30:55 Metric: 0 Metric2: 2
> Task: BGP_64513.10.0.2.1+63485
> Announcement bits (2): 0-KRT 1-BGP RT Background
> AS path: 64514 I (Originator) Cluster list: 10.0.2.1
> AS path: Originator ID: 10.0.6.1
> Communities: target:64513:100
> Import Accepted
> VPN Label: 16
> Localpref: 100
> Router ID: 10.0.2.1
> Primary Routing Table bgp.l3vpn.0
> Indirect next hops: 1
> Protocol next hop: 10.0.6.1 Metric: 2
> Push 16
> Indirect next hop: 8ffc000 131071
> Indirect path forwarding next hops: 2
> Next hop type: Router
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
> 10.0.6.1/32 Originating RIB: inet.3
> Metric: 2 Node path count: 1
> Forwarding nexthops: 2
> Nexthop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Nexthop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
> BGP Preference: 170/-101
> Route Distinguisher: 64513:1
> Next hop type: Indirect
> Next-hop reference count: 10
> Source: 10.0.5.1
> Next hop type: Router, Next hop index: 131070
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0, selected
> Label operation: Push 16
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
> Label operation: Push 16
> Protocol next hop: 10.0.6.1
> Push 16
> Indirect next hop: 8ffc000 131071
> State: <Secondary NotBest Int Ext>
> Inactive reason: Not Best in its group - Update source
> Local AS: 64513 Peer AS: 64513
> Age: 30:55 Metric: 0 Metric2: 2
> Task: BGP_64513.10.0.5.1+56350
> AS path: 64514 I (Originator) Cluster list: 10.0.5.1
> AS path: Originator ID: 10.0.6.1
> Communities: target:64513:100
> Import Accepted
> VPN Label: 16
> Localpref: 100
> Router ID: 10.0.5.1
> Primary Routing Table bgp.l3vpn.0
> Indirect next hops: 1
> Protocol next hop: 10.0.6.1 Metric: 2
> Push 16
> Indirect next hop: 8ffc000 131071
> Indirect path forwarding next hops: 2
> Next hop type: Router
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
> 10.0.6.1/32 Originating RIB: inet.3
> Metric: 2 Node path count: 1
> Forwarding nexthops: 2
> Nexthop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Nexthop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
>
> I have the Label for the Next-Hop 10.0.6.1 on the Core Router but on
> PE1 its just OSPF route..I think thats the problem here but how can I
> get label for remote PE loopback with broken LSPs..LDP tunneling is
> not the solution here I think..I tried announcing the PE1-P1 RSVP-LSP
> into OSPF but that also did not work..
>
> lab@core1.pop1# run show route 10.0.6.1
>
> inet.0: 18 destinations, 20 routes (18 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> + = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
>
> 10.0.6.1/32 *[RSVP/7/1] 06:28:58, metric 1
> > to 10.0.10.22 via ge-0/0/3.0,
> label-switched-path to_edge1.pop2
> [OSPF/10] 00:03:14, metric 1
> > to 10.0.10.22 via ge-0/0/3.0
>
> inet.3: 2 destinations, 2 routes (2 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> + = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
>
> 10.0.6.1/32 *[RSVP/7/1] 06:28:58, metric 1
> > to 10.0.10.22 via ge-0/0/3.0,
> label-switched-path to_edge1.pop2
>
> root@edge1.pop1# run show route 10.0.6.1
>
> inet.0: 17 destinations, 19 routes (17 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> + = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
>
> 10.0.6.1/32 *[OSPF/10] 00:04:16, metric 2
> to 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> > to 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
>
> inet.3: 10 destinations, 12 routes (10 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> + = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
>
> 10.0.6.1/32 *[OSPF/10] 00:04:16, metric 2
> to 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> > to 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0
>
> Announcing LSP into IGP OSPF
>
> lab@edge1.pop1# run show route 10.0.6.1 extensive
>
> inet.0: 17 destinations, 19 routes (17 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> 10.0.6.1/32 (1 entry, 1 announced)
> TSI:
> KRT in-kernel 10.0.6.1/32 -> {10.0.10.10}
> *OSPF Preference: 10
> Next hop type: Router
> Next-hop reference count: 6
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0, selected
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
> State: <Active Int>
> Local AS: 64513
> Age: 11 Metric: 2
> Area: 0.0.0.0
> Task: OSPF
> Announcement bits (1): 0-KRT
> AS path: I
> Secondary Tables: inet.3
>
> inet.3: 10 destinations, 12 routes (10 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>
> 10.0.6.1/32 (1 entry, 1 announced)
> *OSPF Preference: 10
> Next hop type: Router
> Next-hop reference count: 6
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0, selected
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
> State: <Secondary Active Int>
> Local AS: 64513
> Age: 11 Metric: 2
> Area: 0.0.0.0
> Task: OSPF
> Announcement bits (1): 2-Resolve tree 1
> AS path: I
> Primary Routing Table inet.0
>
> I even tried manullay setting nect-hop of remote PE2 as LSP but that
> also did not work
>
> lab@edge1.pop1# run show route 10.0.6.1 extensive
>
> inet.0: 17 destinations, 20 routes (17 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
> 10.0.6.1/32 (2 entries, 1 announced)
> TSI:
> KRT in-kernel 10.0.6.1/32 -> {10.0.10.2}
> *Static Preference: 5
> Next hop type: Router
> Next-hop reference count: 1
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1, selected
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
> State: <Active Int Ext>
> Local AS: 64513
> Age: 12
> Task: RT
> Announcement bits (1): 0-KRT
> AS path: I
> OSPF Preference: 10
> Next hop type: Router
> Next-hop reference count: 6
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0, selected
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
> State: <Int>
> Inactive reason: Route Preference
> Local AS: 64513
> Age: 4:19 Metric: 2
> Area: 0.0.0.0
> Task: OSPF
> AS path: I
> Secondary Tables: inet.3
>
> inet.3: 10 destinations, 12 routes (10 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
>
> 10.0.6.1/32 (1 entry, 1 announced)
> *OSPF Preference: 10
> Next hop type: Router
> Next-hop reference count: 6
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0, selected
> Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
> Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
> Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
> State: <Secondary Active Int>
> Local AS: 64513
> Age: 4:19 Metric: 2
> Area: 0.0.0.0
> Task: OSPF
> Announcement bits (1): 2-Resolve tree 1
> AS path: I
> Primary Routing Table inet.0
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Vaibhava Varma
> On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 9:39 PM, Mark Tinka <mti...@globaltransit.net>
> wrote:
> > On Sunday, December 25, 2011 09:35:52 PM vaibhava varma
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks a lot for your response..I have everything working
> >> fine withLDP without any issues..I just wanted to deploy
> >> RSVP-TE for fasterfailover in the backbone..
> >
> > Ah okay. Got you.
> >
> >> And there I
> >> got stuck up with the full-meshof TE among PEs or using
> >> Broken Static LSPs between PE-P and P-PE..
> >
> > What we've done, in one of our networks, to scale MPLS-TE
> > was to enable RSVP only in the core, run LDP everywhere else
> > and tunnel LDP in RSVP in the core.
> >
> > This was mostly to create single-hop LSP's so that we can
> > solve unequal-cost path issues in the IGP to better utilize
> > previously idle core links.
> >
> > That said, "MPLS-Enabled Applications" by Ina Minei & Julian
> > Lucek is one place where I've seen RFC 4206 mechanisms
> > documented in some form:
> >
> >
> http://books.google.com.my/books?id=3MszQLz2cdwC&pg=PT66&lpg=PT66&dq=mpls+enabled+applications+label+operations+are+analogous+to+those+in+the+ldp&source=bl&ots=Abxedzafk8&sig=ZlvuaQ0PLqpMmZIqQVp5tL_Zppw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=00j3TtXzDMnOrQePvexD&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
> >
> >
> > Page 30 is what you're after. Maybe that can help - I can
> > theorize its operations, but we haven't deployed this
> > particular architecture in the field.
> >
> >> Thanks for
> >> sharing the rib-import methodology to get rid of
> >> staticroutes for inet.3 resolution for BGP-Next Hops..
> >
> > Most welcome.
> >
> >> Just a clarification on the "ldp-tunneling" part..Do I
> >> need to applythis at all the PE/P routers to run LDP
> >> over broken LSPs between PEs..Is there a provision in
> >> Junos without using LDP Tunneling to passtraffic between
> >> PEs when using broken LSPs ?
> >
> > I usually recommend that LDPoRSVP always be enabled on
> > ingress routers for all LSP's. I also encourage them to be
> > enabled on P routers that are also acting as ingress routers
> > for RSVP LSP's.
> >
> > Otherwise, if a P router is merely a transit node for an
> > LSP, then you wouldn't even be able to enabled LDPoRSVP, as
> > you wouldn't have an LSP or tunnel under which to do that,
> > both in IOS and Junos.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Mark.
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
> Vaibhava Varma
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
--
Best Regards!
Ivan Ivanov
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
