That's great to hear Martin! Let us know if you have any further problem :)
Best, Alberto On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Martin Grabner <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Alberto and Lori, > > thanks Lori for adding the missing configuration on the map server. Lisp > to lisp traffic now flowes directly as it should. Also thanks to Alberto > for your great help! > > Best Regards > Martin > > *Gesendet:* Dienstag, 10. Februar 2015 um 18:33 Uhr > *Von:* "Lori Jakab" <[email protected]> > *An:* "Alberto Rodriguez-Natal" <[email protected]>, "Martin Grabner" < > [email protected]> > *Cc:* LISPmob <[email protected]> > *Betreff:* Re: [LISPmob-users] PPP/3G connection issue with RLOC on newer > lispmob versions > Hi Alberto and Martin, > > It looks like the site was not configured on one of the four map-servers > (not sure why). I just added the missing configuration. Can you please > check if this solves the problem? > > -Lori > > > On Feb 10, 2015, at 6:01 PM, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Martin, > > That's an odd behavior. It seems that the Mapping System is replying with > a /28 instead of a /29 which should be the case. > > Can you confirm that 153.16.45.224/29 is registering properly? i.e. do > you receive a correct Map Notify? > > If everything is working right on your side, it maybe a problem on the > Mapping System. I'm CCing Lori just in case. > > Alberto > > On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Martin Grabner <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hi Alberto, >> >> I've debugged a bit whats the cause that traffic between my lisp sites >> are routed over PxTR. For easier debugging i removed all v6 RLOCs (as v6 is >> established through an tunnelbroker what may cause problems) - so I had two >> sites with one public routeable v4 RLOC for each site. >> >> I've pinged from 153.16.45.233 (EID space 153.16.45.232/30) to >> 153.16.45.225 (153.16.45.224/29) and traffic also flowed via PxTR. >> >> It looks like lispmob is looking up map cache for 153.16.45.224/24, >> while it should lookup 153.16.45.224/29. The map cache lookup from -d 3 >> log looks like this >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: >> OUTPUT: Orig src: 153.16.45.233 0 | Orig dst: 153.16.45.225 0 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: lookup_map_cache_node: The entry >> 153.16.45.225 is not found in the map cache >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG: No map cache retrieved for eid 153.16.45.225 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Added map cache entry for EID: >> 153.16.45.225/32 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Record information EID: 153.16.45.232/30 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Record information Locator: 178.113.68.189 >> P:1-W:20-MP:255-MW:0 Reachable: 1 Probed: 0 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG: Sent Map-Request packet for 153.16.45.225/32 >> to 217.8.98.46: Encap: Y, Probe: N, SMR: N, SMR-inv: N . Nonce: >> 0x01848842-0x55d7b4be >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: >> select_src_rmt_locators_from_balancing_locators_vec: src EID: >> 153.16.45.232, rmt EID: 0.0.0.0, protocol: 1, src port: 0 , dst port: 0 --> >> src RLOC: 178.113.68.189, dst RLOC: 217.8.98.35 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: OUTPUT: Encap src: 178.113.68.189 | Encap >> dst: 217.8.98.35 >> >> >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: Fordwarded packet to petr: 217.8.98.35 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: INPUT (No LISP data): UDP dest: 4342 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: Received IPv4 packet in the control input >> buffer (4342) >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Received a LISP control message at >> 178.113.68.189 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG: Received a LISP Map-Reply message >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: process_map_reply: Nonce of the Map Reply >> is: 0x01848842-0x55d7b4be >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Added map cache entry for EID: >> 153.16.45.224/28 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: EID prefix of the map cache entry >> 153.16.45.225/32 changed to 153.16.45.224/28. >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Activating map cache entry >> 153.16.45.224/28 >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: IDENTIFIER (EID): 153.16.45.224/28 (IID = >> 0), UPTIME: 00:00:00, EXPIRES: 00:15:00 TYPE: Dynamic ACTIVE: Yes >> >> >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG: The map cache entry 153.16.45.224/28 will >> expire in 15 minutes. >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: **************** LISP Mapping Cache >> ****************** >> >> >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: IDENTIFIER (EID): 153.16.45.224/28 (IID = >> 0), UPTIME: 00:00:00, EXPIRES: 00:15:00 TYPE: Dynamic ACTIVE: Yes >> >> >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-3: >> ******************************************************* >> >> >> [2015/2/5 18:21:18] DEBUG-2: Completed processing of LISP control message >> >> When pinging noc.lisp4.net map cache lookup works fine and also traffic >> goes directly and not over PxTR: >> [2015/2/5 18:24:37] DEBUG: Sent Map-Request packet for 153.16.10.11/32 >> to 217.8.98.46: Encap: Y, Probe: N, SMR: N, SMR-inv: N . Nonce: >> 0x066751c3-0x56f7fdff >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-3: INPUT (No LISP data): UDP dest: 4342 >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-3: Received IPv4 packet in the control input >> buffer (4342) >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: Received a LISP control message at >> 178.113.68.189 >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG: Received a LISP Map-Reply message >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: process_map_reply: Nonce of the Map Reply >> is: 0x3b7f6b1d-0x7ffff76e >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: Added map cache entry for EID: >> 153.16.10.0/24 >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: EID prefix of the map cache entry >> 153.16.10.11/32 changed to 153.16.10.0/24. >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: Activating map cache entry 153.16.10.0/24 >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-3: add_locator_to_mapping: The locator >> 173.36.254.162 has been added to the EID 153.16.10.0/24. >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-3: add_locator_to_mapping: The locator >> 173.36.254.177 has been added to the EID 153.16.10.0/24. >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: IDENTIFIER (EID): 153.16.10.0/24 (IID = 0), >> UPTIME: 00:00:00, EXPIRES: 00:00:00 TYPE: Dynamic ACTIVE: Yes >> >> >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: | Locator (RLOC) | >> Status | Priority/Weight | >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: | 173.36.254.162 | >> Up | 1/50 | >> [2015/2/5 18:24:38] DEBUG-2: | 173.36.254.177 | >> Up | 1/50 | >> >> I've tried a workaround with a static map cache at one site - Packets are >> sent to the destination RLOC directly, but the other RLOC replied via PxTR >> (because I only configured the static map cache at one site). With static >> map caches on both sites it works as expected, but not thats of corse not >> practicable. >> >> Best Regards, >> Martin >> >> >
