Traceoptions enabled under BGP will tell you exactly what's happening to the prefix when being received.
On 7/11/12 9:19 AM, "vaibhava varma" <svaibh...@gmail.com> wrote: >Hi Diogo > >Yes the RR Config is fine and the BGP neighbours are negotiated for >inet-vpn. RT I did verify earlier and was correct. > >Unfortuantely I do not have the access right now but I will surely get >you the configs and outputs tomorrow morning. > >COming back to the LSP between the PE and the RR, as I have mentioned >before I do see the PE1 Lo0 in the inet.3 on PE4 but I do not see the >PE2/RR Lo0 in the inet.3 on PE4. How to solve this issue. I suspect >this is the issue. For this I tried to create a static deafult in >inet.3 to resolve hte PE2/RR Loopback but it did not help. Also to >mention on PE2/RR we are using RSVP only and no LDP as its not allwoed >to use it over there. > >Regards >Varma > >On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Diogo Montagner ><diogo.montag...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Based on this, I would check the bgp configuration between pe2 and >> pe4, and the RR configuration as well on PE2. Check if the inet-vpn >> family is negotiated between both neighbors. If the BGP config looks >> fine, then it points to rtarget. >> >> The LSP (LDP or RSVP) between PE and RR is required to activate the >> routes on RR. You can use a static def route or rib group to achieve >> the same. >> >> Pls share the configs and outputs. >> >> Other thing, check if your lo0 filter is allowing the required >> protocols. But if you have problems here, then you should identify >> them in show bgp summ, show ldp session, sh rsvp session, etc >> >> Regards >> >> On 7/12/12, vaibhava varma <svaibh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hi Diogo >>> >>> >>>> - verify the status of the routes in PE4. Are they being received by >>>> the BGP neighbor ? Check the protocol NH status. >>> >>> Routes are not received by BGP neighbour and I verified this "show >>> route receive-protcol bgp x.x.x.x(PE2/RR) >>>> >>>> - you need to have an LSP between the PE1 and your RR. Same for PE4 >>>> and RR. But I am assuming this is fine because you see the routes >>>> being advertised to PE4 from PE2. >>> >>> Yes PE2/RR is advertising routes to PE4 and I have verified this with >>> ""show route advertising-protcol bgp x.x.x.x(PE4) >>> >>>> >>>> - on PE4, you need to have a LDP route for PE1. I think this may be >>>> your issue and this is why I suggested to check with the ping mpls ldp >>>> command. >>> I have the LDP route for PE1 on PE4 and have verified it under the >>> inet.3 table. I am yet to check the ping mpls ldp part and will come >>> back on that. >>> >>> I am still unclear that do we really need an LSP to the RR as RR will >>> not overide the NH to itself while reflection ? >>> >>> Regards >>> Varma >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Diogo Montagner >>> <diogo.montag...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I suggest some steps below: >>>> >>>> - verify the status of the routes in PE4. Are they being received by >>>> the BGP neighbor ? Check the protocol NH status. >>>> >>>> - you need to have an LSP between the PE1 and your RR. Same for PE4 >>>> and RR. But I am assuming this is fine because you see the routes >>>> being advertised to PE4 from PE2. >>>> >>>> - on PE4, you need to have a LDP route for PE1. I think this may be >>>> your issue and this is why I suggested to check with the ping mpls ldp >>>> command. >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> On 7/11/12, vaibhava varma <svaibh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Hi Diogo >>>>> >>>>> They are not hidden and have already verified the route-target.Its >>>>> correctly configured. Any other pointer ? >>>>> >>>>> Also while using RR do we reallly need the Loopback IP of RR used for >>>>> BGP peering to be present in the inet.3 table of PE coz the RR just >>>>> reflects the route and does not modifies the NH. All we should need >>>>>is >>>>> the reachability of the remote PE Loopback IP used for BGP Peering to >>>>> be in the inet.3 at the Local PE. Is that correct ? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks much for your help on this issue. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> Varma >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Diogo Montagner >>>>> <diogo.montag...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> You need check the status of the routes in PE4. If they are hidden >>>>>>it >>>>>> may be a LDP issue. If there is no hidden route then your problem >>>>>>may >>>>>> be wrong route-target selection. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/11/12, vaibhava varma <svaibh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Diogo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have not checked that yet but what I did check was that PE2/RR is >>>>>>> advertising the route via BGP to PE4 and PE4 is not accepting it. >>>>>>> Right now I do not have access to the setup. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please suggest where can be the issue and what more to check apart >>>>>>> from the one you mentioned and I will check and revert in sometime. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Varma >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Diogo Montagner >>>>>>> <diogo.montag...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> What happens if you do a ping mpls ldp from PE4-lo0 to PE1-lo0 ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 7/11/12, vaibhava varma <svaibh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> Dear All >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I was testing a setup whereby I am using mix of LDP and RSVP in >>>>>>>>>the >>>>>>>>> backbone for transporting MPLS VPN Traffic. The setup is >>>>>>>>>something >>>>>>>>> as >>>>>>>>> below: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> CE1--PE1------PE2/RR-------PE3----PE4------CE2 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now we have a limitation that we can only run LDP between PE4 and >>>>>>>>> PE3. >>>>>>>>> From PE3 to PE2/RR we have RSVP. From PE3 to PE1 we have LDP >>>>>>>>> Tunneling >>>>>>>>> over RSVP. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Now the routes of CE1 are not getting installed into the VRF >>>>>>>>>Table >>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>> PE4. When checked the inet.3 table I do not see the route for >>>>>>>>>PE2/RR >>>>>>>>> Loopback but only PE1 and PE3. >>>>>>>>> I tried to add a default static into inet.3 or importing the >>>>>>>>>inet.0 >>>>>>>>> rib to inet.3 on PE4 but still am not seeing routes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think the issue is that the BGP Next Hop is not in inet.3 for >>>>>>>>> PE2/RR. How can I achieve to make this setup working apart from >>>>>>>>> running LDP Tunneling over RSVP between PE4& PE2/RR or between >>>>>>>>>PE3 & >>>>>>>>> PE2/RR. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>>>> Vaibhava Varma >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >>>>>>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ./diogo -montagner >>>>>>>> JNCIE-M 0x41A >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Regards >>>>>>> Vaibhava Varma >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>>>> >>>>>> ./diogo -montagner >>>>>> JNCIE-M 0x41A >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Regards >>>>> Vaibhava Varma >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Sent from my mobile device >>>> >>>> ./diogo -montagner >>>> JNCIE-M 0x41A >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards >>> Vaibhava Varma >>> >> >> -- >> Sent from my mobile device >> >> ./diogo -montagner >> JNCIE-M 0x41A > > > >-- >Regards >Vaibhava Varma >_______________________________________________ >juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp