Greetings
I have the below topology for which am trying to deploy MPLS TE FRR (Link
protection) on IOS XR.
CE1 – PE2 – P3 – PE6 – CE7
|| |
P4P5
Nothing special about the deployment , static routing running between PE and CE
for VRF trans
ests have shown,
I just haven't read it in any document yet.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp On Behalf Of
aar...@gvtc.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:01 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] mpls-te - affinity and link attributes to influence path
selecti
speaking of only 1 unidirectional te-tunnel from headend r20 to tailend r22
like this r20---to--->r22
physical network looks like this...
r20-r21-r22
| |
| |
r24-r25-r23
i'm observing in my lab, under normal
Does anyone know if running MPLS-TE /inside/ a VRF is supported
or works on IOS-XE?
I have been trying it in the lab unsuccessfully. All the commands
take as you would expect but the ingress TE tunnel initialisation
gets stuck when the TE code tells RSVP to send a PATH msg:
"Processing PATH
Hi list,
Long time no write, but I see the 6500 chatter is alive and well. That's good
because I'd like to pick your brains...
I currently take care of an MPLS network running on a pile of SUP720-3B Cisco
6509s (Well, there's an NPE-G2 in there, but that's not important) running a
mix of 12.2(
ginal Message-
From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:49 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc: Aaron; aa...@gvtc.com
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:22:56 PM Aaron wrote:
> Wow that was interesting. Cisco
ginal Message-
From: Mark Tinka [mailto:mark.ti...@seacom.mu]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:49 PM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc: Aaron; aa...@gvtc.com
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:22:56 PM Aaron wrote:
> Wow that was interesting. Cisco
On Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:22:56 PM Aaron wrote:
> Wow that was interesting. Cisco TAC just informed me
> that when an MPLS TE Tunnel exists on an ME3600 that is
> also acting as a PE for vrf traffic that you want to
> flow via the tunnel, you must add "mpls ip" to the
> tunnel interface.
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Aaron
> Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 7:37 AM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
>
> I have
lf Of
Aaron
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 7:37 AM
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
I have what I believe is a MPLS TE config between an me3600 and asr9k.
When I no shut the tunnel interface (bring the tunnel up) on the ME3600,
routing breaks to subnets loca
I have what I believe is a MPLS TE config between an me3600 and asr9k.
When I no shut the tunnel interface (bring the tunnel up) on the ME3600,
routing breaks to subnets located on me3600 in vrf "one". If I shut the
tunnel interface on the asr9k, routing to me3600 subnets is still broken ,
but
e...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 3:18 PM
To: Aaron
Cc: Eric Van Tol; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
Hi,
If you want a simple setup I suggest you go with a single OSPF/ISIS area. A
multi-area setup ca
Van Tol; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
Hi,
If you want a simple setup I suggest you go with a single OSPF/ISIS area. A
multi-area setup can be build, but I'd question the reasons behind doing that.
You're right about the attributes - TE requires additi
i/index.html
From: Aaron mailto:aar...@gvtc.com>>
Date: Thursday, November 6, 2014 at 5:45 AM
To: "cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>"
mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
Hi All, I'm revisiting this to
uting as optional. if this is true, then
what is MPLS TE without TE extentions in the IGP ?
Aaron
From: Darren O'Connor [mailto:darre...@outlook.com]
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2013 11:17 AM
To: Aaron
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
That, and FRR. You need a TED to run
Hai Jin (jhai)
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
Waris, James,
MPLS TE over SVI is not supported.
Will look into the documentation and correct appropriately.
Thanks,
Ramji
From: Waris Sagheer (waris)
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 3:55 AM
To: James Bensley; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Cc
: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
James,
MPLS TE/FRR over Etherchannel is supported since Nov 2013, 15.4(1)S. LDP over
MPLS TE on L2VPN is also supported. We need to fix the documentation.
Wade and Ramji,
Can you please clarify the support for MPLS TE over SVI and Interarea TE
support? We need to
September 5, 2014 at 2:10 AM
To: "cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>"
mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
On 11 September 2013 17:15, Eric Van Tol
mailto:e...@atlantech.net>> wrote:
Hi all,
I'm a
On 05/09/2014 10:10, James Bensley wrote:
Does anyone know if ME3x00's support MPLS-TE FRR over SVIs
no, definitely not yet on SVIs. Dunno about etherchannels.
Nick
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailm
On 11 September 2013 17:15, Eric Van Tol wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm a bit confused about the documentation for the ME3600 with regard to its
> MPLS-TE support. Specifically, the 'MPLS TE' section
> (http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/metro/me3600x_3800x/software/release/15.3_3_S/configuration
pologies for the mobile-device-style top post)
--
* From: * Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) ;
* To: * ; Xu Hu ;
* Cc: * ;
* Subject: * Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
* Sent: * Mon, Feb 27, 2012 5:58:18 AM
"Timer intervals configured, Hello 333 msec, Dead 1, Wait
1, Retransmit 5"
So
Adam,
Thank you very much for your time on this. :-) But don't use too many
ressources looking into it. We're just experimenting to see if we can
have a cheap/easy way to get a little faster failover. If it's too much
trouble we'll stay with what we have.
On Tue, 2013-10-22 at 14:58 +0200, Adam V
Or do you otherwise see that the primary tunnels are protected please?
adam
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Peter Rathlev
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 12:42 AM
To: dip
Cc: cisco-nsp
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE auto-tunnel and ISIS metr
Or do you otherwise see that the primary tunnels are protected please?
adam
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Peter Rathlev
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 12:42 AM
To: dip
Cc: cisco-nsp
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE auto-tunnel and ISIS metr
On Thu, 2013-10-17 at 22:03 -0600, dip wrote:
> i agree in this case probably better option would be to use auto
> tunnel mesh which should satisfy what you are looking for .
Thank you Dip and Adam. Just the information I needed to make something
work. :-)
I have to define a tunnel destination AC
nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Peter Rathlev
> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 9:04 AM
> To: dip
> Cc: cisco-nsp
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE auto-tunnel and ISIS metric
>
> On Wed, 2013-10-16 at 20:50 -0600, dip wrote:
> > let me ask you this first ,is the
alf Of
Peter Rathlev
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2013 9:04 AM
To: dip
Cc: cisco-nsp
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE auto-tunnel and ISIS metric
On Wed, 2013-10-16 at 20:50 -0600, dip wrote:
> let me ask you this first ,is the destination 192.0.2.6 is a loopback
> on Core-2 or its a differen
On Wed, 2013-10-16 at 20:50 -0600, dip wrote:
> let me ask you this first ,is the destination 192.0.2.6 is a loopback
> on Core-2 or its a different physical device attached behind Core-2 ?
> If its a loopback on core-2 then i would suggest to put a different
> router attached to core-2 for accurat
let me ask you this first ,is the destination 192.0.2.6 is a loopback on
Core-2 or its a different physical device attached behind Core-2 ? If its a
loopback on core-2 then i would suggest to put a different router attached
to core-2 for accurate testing .
On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Peter R
On Tue, 2013-10-15 at 17:29 -0600, dip wrote:
> you should be able to see the configs with the help of "show derived
> config interface Tu65336"
Ooh, I didn't know that command. Very nice. :-)
interface Tunnel65336
ip unnumbered Loopback0
no ip redirects
no logging event link-s
Peter,
you should be able to see the configs with the help of "show derived config
interface Tu65336" , one thing you would notice is that they are created
with explicit path option not dynamic path option and thats why you see
that its not following shortest path based on your IGP metric.Though
On Mon, 2013-10-14 at 15:49 +0200, Adam Vitkovsky wrote:
> I think if it's "onehop" the te-tunnels are actually established to
> the next-hop IP address on all directly connected interfaces enabled
> with cmd: "mpls ip" creating uniform overlay to the physical links.
> Can you please check this as
e the direct link/te-tunnel between dist-1 and core-2.
adam
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Peter Rathlev
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 2:07 PM
To: cisco-nsp
Subject: [c-nsp] MPLS TE auto-tunnel and ISIS metric
What does our MPLS
e the direct link/te-tunnel between dist-1 and core-2.
adam
-Original Message-
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
Peter Rathlev
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2013 2:07 PM
To: cisco-nsp
Subject: [c-nsp] MPLS TE auto-tunnel and ISIS metric
What does our MPLS
What does our MPLS TE auto-tunnels not follow the configured ISIS
metric? :-)
We have a lab setup like this:
++ A D ++
| core-1 |-| core-2 |-> upstream
+\___ ___/+
C |B \ / E | F
| X |
G |H___/ \__I
mailto:pshe...@gmail.com>>
Date: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 12:35 PM
To: Eric Van Tol mailto:e...@atlantech.net>>
Cc: "cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>"
mailto:cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
Hi,
W
Hi,
On 13 September 2013 03:10, Eric Van Tol wrote:
>
> Thanks for the insight. I've confirmed in the lab that explicit paths allow
> LSP setup across areas.
>
> And just to confirm, if our switches have no routed ports on the core-facing
> side, where MPLS and EFPs are configured, enabling FR
> -Original Message-
> From: Pshem Kowalczyk [mailto:pshe...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 3:36 PM
> To: Eric Van Tol
> Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
>
> Hi,
>
> We use ME3600x with MPLS TE. I ca
Kowalczyk
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 2:36 PM
To: Eric Van Tol
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS-TE on ME3600
Hi,
We use ME3600x with MPLS TE. I can't comment on the first point (we don't
have multiple areas), but on the second one - path protection is prot
to be passed into other areas)
>
> Aaron
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
> Pshem Kowalczyk
> Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2013 2:36 PM
> To: Eric Van Tol
> Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Sub
Hi,
We use ME3600x with MPLS TE. I can't comment on the first point (we
don't have multiple areas), but on the second one - path protection is
protection end-to-end, whilst FRR uses a local repair mechanism, so
these two are quite different in the way they work. FRR on that device
works fine and p
Hi all,
I'm a bit confused about the documentation for the ME3600 with regard to its
MPLS-TE support. Specifically, the 'MPLS TE' section
(http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/metro/me3600x_3800x/software/release/15.3_3_S/configuration/guide/swmpls.html#wp1183331)
states:
The switch does n
Yes you loose-hop to your ABR. OF course you lose proper TE capabilities but it
works
> From: gunner_...@live.com
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 01:38:19 +0300
> Subject: [c-nsp] MPLS TE
>
> Hi allI have 5 routers running ISIS level-2 and level-1I
Hi allI have 5 routers running ISIS level-2 and level-1I want to configure MPLS
TE with explicit path , now when i configure the explicit paths should i
combine next-address with next-address loose ?
Thanks
___
cisco-
05.02.2013 13:08, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) пишет:
On 05/02/2013 11:03, "Artyom Viklenko" wrote:
05.02.2013 10:30, sth...@nethelp.no пишет:
New ip addresses was configured as secondary on interfaces in question.
These new subnets (/30) appear in routing table, cef, etc. Network
statement als
05.02.2013 13:47, Adam Vitkovsky пишет:
You haven't quite answered my first question :)
Let's say you have two routers A and B
-are A and B connected via two ip interfaces/links?
In some part of network we have more than one link between
two neighboring routers, as I noted in previous answer.
M
You haven't quite answered my first question :)
Let's say you have two routers A and B
-are A and B connected via two ip interfaces/links?
Because if that's not the case,
than you can use loopback ip addresses of A and B -rather than A's and B's
interface address to dictate an explicit path fo
On 05/02/2013 11:03, "Artyom Viklenko" wrote:
>05.02.2013 10:30, sth...@nethelp.no пишет:
>>> New ip addresses was configured as secondary on interfaces in question.
>>> These new subnets (/30) appear in routing table, cef, etc. Network
>>> statement also was added to ospf configuration.
>>
>> N
Not sure, but could it be that OSPF marks secondary subnets as
"stub-networks" in the database. I can imagine this would prevent TE it
from using it as a transit link. Again, not sure. Can you setup a tunnel
with a secondary IP as start- or end-point of the tunnel (not transit)?
/Eduard
On Tue,
05.02.2013 10:30, sth...@nethelp.no пишет:
New ip addresses was configured as secondary on interfaces in question.
These new subnets (/30) appear in routing table, cef, etc. Network
statement also was added to ospf configuration.
Note that it at least *used* to be the case that OSPF wouldn't fo
Of Artyom Viklenko
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 8:41 AM
To: 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: [c-nsp] MPLS TE explicit-path: secondary ip as next-address
Hi, List!
We need to re-number several links of our MPLS backbone network due to some
reason. And would like to minimize downtime.
-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Artyom Viklenko
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 8:41 AM
To: 'cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net'
Subject: [c-nsp] MPLS TE explicit-path: secondary ip as next-address
Hi, List!
We need to re-number several links of our MPLS backbone network due to some
reason. An
> New ip addresses was configured as secondary on interfaces in question.
> These new subnets (/30) appear in routing table, cef, etc. Network
> statement also was added to ospf configuration.
Note that it at least *used* to be the case that OSPF wouldn't form
adjacencies over secondary addresses.
Hi, List!
We need to re-number several links of our MPLS backbone network
due to some reason. And would like to minimize downtime.
We have many MPLS TE tunnesl with explicit paths configured with
old ips as next-address.
New ip addresses was configured as secondary on interfaces in question.
The
So to summarize what Christian and Jefri said.
First you need to create a te-tunnel than bypasses the link you'd like to
protect.
Than you need to instruct that link to use the te-tunnel as backup path.
Last you'd configure the tunnel mpls traffic-eng fast-reroute bw-protect on
the primary tunne
Hi, need to create protection tunnel that will protect the link or node
whichever is required.
On Dec 20, 2012 7:02 PM, "Jefri Abdullah" wrote:
> On 2012-12-20 05:05 PM, M K wrote:
>
>
> Now , the explicit path is working fine , when I shutdown one of the
>> links across the MPLS backbone , the
On 2012-12-20 05:05 PM, M K wrote:
Now , the explicit path is working fine , when I shutdown one of the
links across the MPLS backbone , the tunnel interfaces become up
again
due to the dynamic path configured under the tunnel interface
Now , when I remove the dynamic and configure FRR instea
recovered
> Midpoints: 0, Tails: 1
>P2MP:
> Head: 0 interfaces, 0 active signalling attempts, 0 established
>0 sub-LSP activations, 0 sub-LSP deactivations
>0 LSP successful activations, 0 LSP deactivations
>0 SSO recovery attempts,
; From: cozz...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE
> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 21:22:18 +1100
> To: gunner_...@live.com
>
> Hi,
>
> Please post all of your configurations and not just the Tunnels, plus the
> usual TE verification show commands such as "show mpls
Hi,
Please post all of your configurations and not just the Tunnels, plus the usual
TE verification show commands such as "show mpls traffic-eng tunnels", "show
mpls traffic-eng topology"
Cheers,
Joe
Sent from my iPhone
On 20/12/2012, at 21:05, M K wrote:
>
> Hi all
> I have configured MP
Hi all
I have configured MPLS TE with RSVP using ISIS inside the MPLS core
R2 and R4 are my PE routers
R2#sh run int tun0
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 259 bytes
!
interface Tunnel0
ip unnumbered Loopback0
tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
tunnel destination 4.4.4.4
tunnel mpl
Hi Team,
By default, the MPLS/TE weight will inherit the cost from IGP, in my
situation is that there are two same cost path in the MPLS/TE network, i
don't know which one will be choose as auto-mesh tunnel, which one will be
choose as backup tunnel, cannot find any clear answers from cisco.com.
r.net
Subject: [c-nsp] MPLS TE Load Balancing
Hi Group,
I'm wondering about a strange behaviour about MPLS TE on ASR9K
I have two MPLS TE tunnels (with autoroute announce):
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show route 10.100.100.7
Thu Mar 29 23:09:49.818 UTC
Routing entry for 10.100.100.7/32
Known
Actually from the command " show route 10.100.100.7 " we can see the two
path is the same metric.
You are using OSPF for TE, or ISIS? Can check the database if the metric if
same or not?
Because i think by default the cost is same, will load-share the traffic.
BTW, just now, i check my ASR9000, als
Hi!
Yes, unlinke CRS, MPLSTE Unequal Load Balancing currently is not supported on
both Trident and Typhoon A9K cards.
Seems it will be supported on Typhoon in the future, but not on Trident.
So, it is difinitely not Your case :)
--
Dmitry Kiselev
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 09:02:27PM -0500, oma
Hi Xu Hu:
I've tried to configure load-share unfortunately it is not supported :(
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#load-share 100
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#interface tunnel-te501
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#load-share
% Incomplete command.
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413(config-if)#load-sha
Check the load-share command under the tunnel configuration.
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 30 Mar, 2012, at 8:43, omar parihuana wrote:
> RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show run int tunnel-te 501
> Thu Mar 29 23:38:02.719 UTC
> interface tunnel-te501
> ipv4 unnumbered Loopback0
> load-interval 30
> a
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show run int tunnel-te 501
Thu Mar 29 23:38:02.719 UTC
interface tunnel-te501
ipv4 unnumbered Loopback0
load-interval 30
autoroute announce
!autoroute announce
destination 10.100.100.3
fast-reroute
path-option 10 explicit name 413-312
!
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show run
Can share your configuration? Recently I was also configuring the MPLS TE in
asr9k.
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 30 Mar, 2012, at 8:28, omar parihuana wrote:
> Hi Group,
>
> I'm wondering about a strange behaviour about MPLS TE on ASR9K
>
> I have two MPLS TE tunnels (with autoroute announce
Hi Group,
I'm wondering about a strange behaviour about MPLS TE on ASR9K
I have two MPLS TE tunnels (with autoroute announce):
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:9K6-413#show route 10.100.100.7
Thu Mar 29 23:09:49.818 UTC
Routing entry for 10.100.100.7/32
Known via "isis BACKBONE", distance 115, metric 140, type
David Barak
>> (apologies for the mobile-device-style top post)
>>
>> --
>> * From: * Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) ;
>> * To: * ; Xu Hu ;
>> * Cc: * ;
>> * Subject: * Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
>> * Sent:
-device-style top post)
>
> --
> * From: * Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) ;
> * To: * ; Xu Hu ;
> * Cc: * ;
> * Subject: * Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
> * Sent: * Mon, Feb 27, 2012 5:58:18 AM
>
>
> > > "Timer intervals configured,
BFD is great stuff. Is there any chance of getting BFD on the 45k platform?
David Barak
(apologies for the mobile-device-style top post)
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
> > "Timer intervals configured, Hello 333 msec, Dead 1, Wait
> > 1, Retransmit 5"
>
> So what you're talking about is the "OSPF Support for Fast
> Hellos" feature from Cisco:
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/fasthelo.html
>
>
> This feature combines the Hello Interv
Ok, thanks. Got it. I think we need to reconfigure the 7600 routers to support
BFD.
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 27 Feb, 2012, at 12:43, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Monday, February 27, 2012 12:14:15 PM Xu Hu wrote:
>
>> Yes, i am referring the ospf hello-interval.
>> In the 7609 IOS configuration
On Monday, February 27, 2012 12:14:15 PM Xu Hu wrote:
> Yes, i am referring the ospf hello-interval.
> In the 7609 IOS configuration, under the interface, we
> had the ospf configuration as bellow:
>
> "ip ospf dead-interval minimal hello-multiplier 3"
> if we configure this command, the ospf hel
Yes, i am referring the ospf hello-interval.
In the 7609 IOS configuration, under the interface, we had the ospf
configuration as bellow:
"ip ospf dead-interval minimal hello-multiplier 3"
if we configure this command, the ospf hello interval will be 333 msec.
"Timer intervals configured, Hello 3
On Monday, February 27, 2012 12:04:54 PM Mark Tinka wrote:
> Are you sure you're referring to the Hello Intervals? I
> know millisecond values for OSPF timers would be
> possible for LSA calculations, and this applies to both
> IOS and IOS XR.
Oh, and just to add, RFC 2328 (OSPFv2) states that th
On Monday, February 27, 2012 11:50:59 AM Xu Hu wrote:
> Did you ever encounter the OSPF hello
> interval problems in the IOS-XR? Before we used the
> IOS-XR, we run the OSPF in 7609, the ospf hello interval
> is msec, but now we cannot configure the msec in IOS-XR
> in ASR9K, one of my friends fro
Ok, got it. Since i saw you are very familiar with the IOS-XR, i had
another problems to ask for your help, thanks. Lol.
Did you ever encounter the OSPF hello interval problems in the IOS-XR?
Before we used the IOS-XR, we run the OSPF in 7609, the ospf hello interval
is msec, but now we cannot conf
On Monday, February 27, 2012 11:41:31 AM Xu Hu wrote:
> By the way, what kind of
> platform your juniper is?
Any Junos-based device will exhibit this issue with IOS XR.
We're running various Juniper platforms; M7i, M10i, M120,
M320, T320 and MX480.
Mark.
signature.asc
Description: This is a
Thanks, Mark, so far we don't contact the IOS-XR equipments to the Juniper
ones, just IOS-XR contact IOS.
But thanks for your reminding. By the way, what kind of platform your
juniper is?
2012/2/27 Mark Tinka
> One thing I'd like to add for those who may be running RSVP-
> TE between IOS XR and
One thing I'd like to add for those who may be running RSVP-
TE between IOS XR and Junos platforms with HMAC-MD5
authentication:
Your IOS XR authentication configuration would need to look
like this:
key chain your-key-chain-name
key 1
accept-lifetime 00:00:00 january 01 2000 infinite
key-
; Gmail
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
> Well for auto-tunnel it's dynamic by definition right?
> I'm not sure whether you might somehow specify NHs that auto-tunnels should
> use -doesn't make sense
yes, agreed, but y
hursday, February 23, 2012 1:00 PM
> To: Vitkovsky, Adam
> Cc: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer); cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
>
> I know, but my situation is auto-tunnel mesh.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Xu Hu
>
> On 23
---
From: Gmail [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 1:00 PM
To: Vitkovsky, Adam
Cc: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer); cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
I know, but my situation is auto-tunnel mesh.
Thanks and regards,
Xu Hu
On 2
> > Yes, correct. One more thing, in the IOS we configure the " tunnel
mpls
> traffic-eng path-option 1 dynamic" to automatic calculate the path,
now in
> the IOS-XR, no more?
No, as already mentioned earlier, there is currently no option to
specify different path-options for auto-mesh tunnels. s
erface
>
> adam
>
> From: 许虎 [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 11:58 AM
> To: Vitkovsky, Adam
> Cc: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer); cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
>
> Yes, correc
); cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
Yes, correct. One more thing, in the IOS we configure the " tunnel mpls
traffic-eng path-option 1 dynamic" to automatic calculate the path, now in the
IOS-XR, no more?
Thanks/Xu Hu
在 2012年2月23日 下午6:15
23, 2012 10:48 AM
> To: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
> Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
>
> Hi Oil,
> Below is my whole config of the ASR9K, now the tunnel can up.
>
> mpls traffic-eng
> interface TenGigE0/0/0/
rsday, February 23, 2012 10:48 AM
To: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
Hi Oil,
Below is my whole config of the ASR9K, now the tunnel can up.
mpls traffic-eng
interface TenGigE0/0/0/0
!
interface TenGigE0/1/0/0
@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
Hi Oil,
Below is my whole config of the ASR9K, now the tunnel can up.
mpls traffic-eng
interface TenGigE0/0/0/0
!
interface TenGigE0/1/0/0.1700
!
auto-tunnel mesh
group 1
destination-list 1
!
group 2
destination
ces enabled for MPLS-TE (i.e.
> the ones enabled under “mpls traffic-eng”)..
>
> ** **
>
> oli
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* 许虎 [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 21 February 2012 10:03
> *To:* Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
> *Cc:* cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
>
> *Subject:* Re:
(i.e. the
ones enabled under “mpls traffic-eng”)..
oli
From: 许虎 [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
Sent: 21 February 2012 10:03
To: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
The MPLS TE signaling usually
oli
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* 许虎 [mailto:jstuxuhu0...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 20 February 2012 14:00
> *To:* Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
> *Subject:* Re: [c-nsp] MPLS TE conver from IOS to IOS-XR
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks, oil, i will try in the live network tomorrow.
Hi,
> Since now I can make sure the "Group" command in IOS-XR is the same to the
> "Auto-Template" in IOS, but my problem is that in the IOS "Auto-Template" I
> can use the below command :
>
> interface Auto-Template1
> mpls mtu 17916
> tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce
> tunnel mpls t
Hu,
>
> We had four 7609-S which they run mpls te with each other, now we upgrade
> one 7609-S to ASR9k platform.
> [...]
> I had one questions, in the IOS-XR, I didn’t find any configuration about
> the auto-mesh or auto-template configuration example, is anyone know how to
> configure?
auto-t
Hi,
On 20 February 2012 20:07, 许虎 wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> We had four 7609-S which they run mpls te with each other, now we upgrade
> one 7609-S to ASR9k platform.
> The topology as bellow:
>
> 7609-1-7609-2
> | |
> |
Hi Team,
We had four 7609-S which they run mpls te with each other, now we upgrade
one 7609-S to ASR9k platform.
The topology as bellow:
7609-1-7609-2
||
||
7609-3-ASR9K
In the old platform 7609-s,
On Saturday, October 22, 2011 02:35:33 AM Phil Mayers wrote:
> ...in particular, the "autoroute metric absolute" is
> needed to fix the metrics so that the tunnels are
> equal-cost, yes?
That's right.
> Do I want "autoroute announce"? Since the routes I care
> about are BGP, the only thing I nee
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
