Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
On Tuesday, December 27, 2011 05:03:06 PM Johannes Resch wrote: FWIW, we're using NG-MVPN based on mLDP with 11.2 in production (MX/T). Works well so far,... Great to hear. Are you using it for real-time Multicast, e.g., IPTv, or non-critical Multicast? Our target is to use mLDP for non-critical, data Multicast services, and leave RSVP for IPTv and such. but of course there are caveats, particularly on the HA side - missing NSR/ISSU support, Is Graceful Restart supported, at least? missing link-protection etc. Well, LDP has no link-protection capabilities, so not sure how those would come to mLDP. What I know Cisco are doing with their mLDP implementation for now is link-protection, but via RSVP. I haven't tested it, though. And, still no NSR/ISSU support for the NG-MVPN BGP AFI :/ That is not specific to mLDP, though. We're still relying on Graceful Restart for that. 11.2 releases prior to 11.2R4 have quite a few nasty NG-MVPN PIM bugs, would recommend to stay away of those. As one would with any pre-R4 release :-). PS: we have ERs open to cover all the missing HA NG-MVPN/mLDP points. If anyone else is interested in those features, drop me a mail. Might be possible to speed up implementation if more customer demand can be demonstrated to Juniper.. Yes, we're certainly interested in having those features there. Cheers, Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
On 26.12.2011 16:49, Mark Tinka wrote: On Monday, December 26, 2011 11:23:38 PM vaibhava varma wrote: I was wondering whether mLDP with Junos has been out of roadmap and now ready for field deployment ? mLDP showed up in Junos 11.2: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos11.2/topics/example/mcast- mbgp-mvpn-ldp.html FWIW, we're using NG-MVPN based on mLDP with 11.2 in production (MX/T). Works well so far, but of course there are caveats, particularly on the HA side - missing NSR/ISSU support, missing link-protection etc. And, still no NSR/ISSU support for the NG-MVPN BGP AFI :/ That is not specific to mLDP, though. 11.2 releases prior to 11.2R4 have quite a few nasty NG-MVPN PIM bugs, would recommend to stay away of those. cheers, -jr PS: we have ERs open to cover all the missing HA NG-MVPN/mLDP points. If anyone else is interested in those features, drop me a mail. Might be possible to speed up implementation if more customer demand can be demonstrated to Juniper.. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
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
*BGPPreference: 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
BGPPreference: 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
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
On Monday, December 26, 2011 03:24:21 PM vaibhava varma wrote: 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.. That's interesting, because I recall you mentioned that you have LDP enabled everywhere and that is already working; that you only needed RSVP for MPLS-FRR and MPLS-TE. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
HI Mark
Oh Yes what I mentioned for using LDP was without RSVP-TE at all..I
was trying to run RSVP-TE without using LDP at all..
With Ivan's suggestion I was enabled to get lables for the remote PE's
Loopback,,,
Thanks much to You and Ivan for your support on getting hold of this issue..
I finally summarize the network setup requirement to establish MPLS
VPN Traffic flow across Broken LSP as
1. Enable PE-P and P-PE RSVP TEs
2. Announce the RSVP-TEs into the IGP on PE and P routers
5. Import inet.0 routes to inet.3 using rib-group import at PE-Routers/RRs
3.Enable LDP Tunneling on the RSVP-TE at PE and P routers
4.Enable LDP on the Loopback interface at PE and P routers.
Thanks much again for all your help..
lab@edge1.pop1# run traceroute 10.0.6.1
traceroute to 10.0.6.1 (10.0.6.1), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 10.0.10.10 (10.0.10.10) 3.943 ms 1.811 ms 2.832 ms
MPLS Label=300688 CoS=0 TTL=1 S=1
2 10.0.6.1 (10.0.6.1) 11.451 ms 3.897 ms 8.285 ms
[edit]
lab@edge1.pop1#
lab@edge1.pop1# run show route 10.0.6.1 extensive
inet.0: 17 destinations, 22 routes (17 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
10.0.6.1/32 (2 entries, 2 announced)
State: FlashAll
TSI:
KRT in-kernel 10.0.6.1/32 - {Push 300688}
*LDPPreference: 9
Next hop type: Router
Next-hop reference count: 3
Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
Label operation: Push 300608
Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
Label operation: Push 300608
Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1, selected
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
Label operation: Push 300688
Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
Label operation: Push 300688
State: Active Int
Local AS: 64513
Age: 53 Metric: 1
Task: LDP
Announcge-0/0/ent bits (1): 0-KRT
AS path: I
Secondary Tables: inet.3
OSPF Preference: 10
Next hop type: Router
Next-hop reference count: 5
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: 22:46 Metric: 2
Area: 0.0.0.0
Task: OSPF
Announcge-0/0/ent bits (1): 3-LDP
AS path: I
Secondary Tables: inet.3
inet.3: 10 destinations, 15 routes (10 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)
10.0.6.1/32 (2 entries, 2 announced)
State: FlashAll
*LDPPreference: 9
Next hop type: Router
Next-hop reference count: 3
Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
Label operation: Push 300608
Next hop: 10.0.10.2 via ge-0/0/0.0 weight 0x1
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop1
Label operation: Push 300608
Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1, selected
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
Label operation: Push 300688
Next hop: 10.0.10.10 via ge-0/0/1.0 weight 0x1
Label-switched-path to_core1.pop2
Label operation: Push 300688
State: Secondary Active Int
Local AS: 64513
Age: 53 Metric: 1
Task: LDP
Announcge-0/0/ent bits (1): 2-Resolve tree 1
AS path: I
Primary Routing Table inet.0
OSPF Preference: 10
Next hop type: Router
Next-hop reference count: 5
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 Int
Inactive reason: Route Preference
Local AS: 64513
Age: 22:46 Metric: 2
Area: 0.0.0.0
Task: OSPF
Announcge-0/0/ent bits (1): 1-LDP
AS path: I
Primary Routing Table inet.0
[edit]
lab@edge1.pop1#
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
On Monday, December 26, 2011 10:37:12 PM vaibhava varma wrote: Oh Yes what I mentioned for using LDP was without RSVP-TE at all..I was trying to run RSVP-TE without using LDP at all.. Ah okay. That makes sense, then, as I assumed you were still running LDP even after turning on RSVP for LDP and RSVP as opposed to LDP or RSVP. With Ivan's suggestion I was enabled to get lables for the remote PE's Loopback,,, Thanks much to You and Ivan for your support on getting hold of this issue.. Glad to hear it's working out. I finally summarize the network setup requirement to establish MPLS VPN Traffic flow across Broken LSP as Just from our own point of view (if you can find this useful), we use both LDP and RSVP in our network. LDP is used everywhere (especially the Metro-E Access switches) and RSVP is only used among the PE Aggregation routers. RSVP is used there as this is the point in the network where we terminate p2mp LSP's for NG-MVPN (IPTv Multicast services). This also includes facility backup (node-link protection) for p2mp and p2p LSP's. The core routers also run LDP and RSVP (RSVP for transit LSP's only). We're looking to support mLDP for p2mp LSP's for data Multicast services, as RSVP might be overkill for such deployments. All PE Aggregation routers run LDPoRSVP. We don't generally plan to run RSVP in the Metro-E Access, due to the sheer number of devices, but might if it makes commercial sense for a couple of customers, e.g., those that require 50ms failover between primary and protect circuits. Cheers, Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
HI Mark Thanks again for sharing your views :-) I was wondering whether mLDP with Junos has been out of roadmap and now ready for field deployment ? Regards Varma On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Mark Tinka mti...@globaltransit.net wrote: On Monday, December 26, 2011 10:37:12 PM vaibhava varma wrote: Oh Yes what I mentioned for using LDP was without RSVP-TE at all..I was trying to run RSVP-TE without using LDP at all.. Ah okay. That makes sense, then, as I assumed you were still running LDP even after turning on RSVP for LDP and RSVP as opposed to LDP or RSVP. With Ivan's suggestion I was enabled to get lables for the remote PE's Loopback,,, Thanks much to You and Ivan for your support on getting hold of this issue.. Glad to hear it's working out. I finally summarize the network setup requirement to establish MPLS VPN Traffic flow across Broken LSP as Just from our own point of view (if you can find this useful), we use both LDP and RSVP in our network. LDP is used everywhere (especially the Metro-E Access switches) and RSVP is only used among the PE Aggregation routers. RSVP is used there as this is the point in the network where we terminate p2mp LSP's for NG-MVPN (IPTv Multicast services). This also includes facility backup (node-link protection) for p2mp and p2p LSP's. The core routers also run LDP and RSVP (RSVP for transit LSP's only). We're looking to support mLDP for p2mp LSP's for data Multicast services, as RSVP might be overkill for such deployments. All PE Aggregation routers run LDPoRSVP. We don't generally plan to run RSVP in the Metro-E Access, due to the sheer number of devices, but might if it makes commercial sense for a couple of customers, e.g., those that require 50ms failover between primary and protect circuits. Cheers, Mark. -- Regards Vaibhava Varma ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
On Monday, December 26, 2011 11:23:38 PM vaibhava varma wrote: I was wondering whether mLDP with Junos has been out of roadmap and now ready for field deployment ? mLDP showed up in Junos 11.2: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos11.2/topics/example/mcast- mbgp-mvpn-ldp.html We haven't tried this yet since we're stuck on 10.4 for now. We'll likely bring this online when both Cisco and Juniper have parity for NG-MVPN driven by mLDP and RSVP. Mark. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
[j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
Dear All I am working on a requirement to enable the MPLS Backbone with MPLS TE in such a way that I have LSPs running from PE-P routers and P-PE routers to avoid full mesh of LSPs. I can not make it working with RSVP as I think I need to enable LDP on the RSVP TE Tunnel but unable to find a way to do so..The MPLS Backbone has separate dedicated VPNv4 RRs . On RRs and PEs I have used a Discard Default Route under inet.3 which helps to reflect the vpnv4 routes from RR and accept them on PEs. Even I tried to announce the LSP into IGP but that did not work and I have to instead manually configure static route under inet.3. I understand this is because the tunnels were PE-P and not PE-PE.. Now how can I solve the issue of passing MPLS VPN Traffic across broken LSPs in the backbone.. Setup is as below RR1 ! ! --LSP1--Core1-LSP2- CE1-PE1MPLS TE-OSPF Area 0 PE2-CE2 --LSP3--Core2-LSP4- ! ! RR2 -- Regards Vaibhava Varma ___ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
On Sunday, December 25, 2011 06:22:18 PM vaibhava varma
wrote:
I am working on a requirement to enable the MPLS Backbone
with MPLS TE in such a way that I have LSPs running from
PE-P routers and P-PE routers to avoid full mesh of
LSPs.
So you mean H-LSP's (RFC's 4206, 6107)
I can not make it working with RSVP as I think I need to
enable LDP on the RSVP TE Tunnel but unable to find a
way to do so..
You mean LDPoRSVP (LDP Tunneling, in Juniper speak):
tinka@lab# show groups mpls-group
protocols {
mpls {
icmp-tunneling;
label-switched-path * {
ldp-tunneling;
least-fill;
node-link-protection;
adaptive;
}
interface xe-*;
interface ge-*;
interface ae*;
}
}
{master}[edit]
tinka@lab#
You're interested in the 'ldp-tunneling' command as noted
above.
The MPLS Backbone has separate dedicated
VPNv4 RRs . On RRs and PEs I have used a Discard Default
Route under inet.3 which helps to reflect the vpnv4
routes from RR and accept them on PEs.
Why don't you consider the installation of the IGP routes
toward the BGP next-hops into 'inet.3' and 'inet6.3'
instead? We do the same (as we don't run MPLS on our
dedicated route reflectors) as below (you're interested in
the 'rib-group' piece mostly):
tinka@lab# show groups isis-group
protocols {
isis {
lsp-lifetime 65535;
ignore-attached-bit;
rib-group inet IGP-RIB;
topologies ipv6-unicast;
overload;
level 1 disable;
level 2 {
authentication-key hidden; ## SECRET-DATA
authentication-type md5;
wide-metrics-only;
}
interface lo0.0 {
passive;
}
interface ge-*;
}
}
{master}[edit]
tinka@lab#
tinka@lab# show routing-options rib-groups
IGP-RIB {
import-rib [ inet.0 inet.3 inet6.3 ];
}
{master}[edit]
tinka@lab#
That should sort you out on the route reflectors so you
don't have to hassle with static default routes.
Now how can I solve the issue of passing MPLS VPN Traffic
across broken LSPs in the backbone..
Just a question - have you not considered just running LDP,
or RSVP-TE a must?
Cheers,
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
HI Mark
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..And there I got stuck up with the full-meshof TE
among PEs or using Broken Static LSPs between PE-P and P-PE..
Thanks for sharing the rib-import methodology to get rid of
staticroutes for inet.3 resolution for BGP-Next Hops..
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 ?
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Mark Tinka mti...@globaltransit.net wrote:
On Sunday, December 25, 2011 06:22:18 PM vaibhava varma
wrote:
I am working on a requirement to enable the MPLS Backbone
with MPLS TE in such a way that I have LSPs running from
PE-P routers and P-PE routers to avoid full mesh of
LSPs.
So you mean H-LSP's (RFC's 4206, 6107)
I can not make it working with RSVP as I think I need to
enable LDP on the RSVP TE Tunnel but unable to find a
way to do so..
You mean LDPoRSVP (LDP Tunneling, in Juniper speak):
tinka@lab# show groups mpls-group
protocols {
mpls {
icmp-tunneling;
label-switched-path * {
ldp-tunneling;
least-fill;
node-link-protection;
adaptive;
}
interface xe-*;
interface ge-*;
interface ae*;
}
}
{master}[edit]
tinka@lab#
You're interested in the 'ldp-tunneling' command as noted
above.
The MPLS Backbone has separate dedicated
VPNv4 RRs . On RRs and PEs I have used a Discard Default
Route under inet.3 which helps to reflect the vpnv4
routes from RR and accept them on PEs.
Why don't you consider the installation of the IGP routes
toward the BGP next-hops into 'inet.3' and 'inet6.3'
instead? We do the same (as we don't run MPLS on our
dedicated route reflectors) as below (you're interested in
the 'rib-group' piece mostly):
tinka@lab# show groups isis-group
protocols {
isis {
lsp-lifetime 65535;
ignore-attached-bit;
rib-group inet IGP-RIB;
topologies ipv6-unicast;
overload;
level 1 disable;
level 2 {
authentication-key hidden; ## SECRET-DATA
authentication-type md5;
wide-metrics-only;
}
interface lo0.0 {
passive;
}
interface ge-*;
}
}
{master}[edit]
tinka@lab#
tinka@lab# show routing-options rib-groups
IGP-RIB {
import-rib [ inet.0 inet.3 inet6.3 ];
}
{master}[edit]
tinka@lab#
That should sort you out on the route reflectors so you
don't have to hassle with static default routes.
Now how can I solve the issue of passing MPLS VPN Traffic
across broken LSPs in the backbone..
Just a question - have you not considered just running LDP,
or RSVP-TE a must?
Cheers,
Mark.
--
Regards
Vaibhava Varma
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
Re: [j-nsp] Juniper MPLS VPN using PE-P and P-PE LSPs !
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
*BGPPreference: 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
BGPPreference: 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
