[GTER] l2circuit/xconnect entre MX-104 e ME3600X

Caio caiot5 at gmail.com
Thu Sep 29 16:34:01 -03 2016


Também não vai:

#ping mpls
Target IPv4, pseudowire or traffic-eng [ipv4]: ipv4
Target IPv4 address: YY.YY.YY.YY
Target mask: 255.255.255.255
Repeat count [5]:
Datagram size [72]:
Timeout in seconds [2]:
Send interval in msec [0]:
Extended commands? [no]:
Sweep range of sizes? [no]:
Sending 5, 72-byte MPLS Echos to YY.YY.YY.YY/32,
     timeout is 2 seconds, send interval is 0 msec:

Codes: '!' - success, 'Q' - request not sent, '.' - timeout,
  'L' - labeled output interface, 'B' - unlabeled output interface,
  'D' - DS Map mismatch, 'F' - no FEC mapping, 'f' - FEC mismatch,
  'M' - malformed request, 'm' - unsupported tlvs, 'N' - no label entry,
  'P' - no rx intf label prot, 'p' - premature termination of LSP,
  'R' - transit router, 'I' - unknown upstream index,
  'l' - Label switched with FEC change, 'd' - see DDMAP for return code,
  'X' - unknown return code, 'x' - return code 0

Type escape sequence to abort.
QQQQQ
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
 Total Time Elapsed 0 ms


Realmente tem alguma coisa errada, só não consigo entender *O QUE*.
A adjacência sobe normal, o VC sobe do lado do Juniper, chequei a config
com a do C2951 que também é uma adjacência de ambos e está IGUAL, somente
com os ips diferentes e no C2951 sobe. Realmente não tenho nenhuma pista do
que pode ser.

2016-09-29 14:45 GMT-03:00 Guilherme de Freitas Figueiredo <
guilhermefreitasfigueiredo at gmail.com>:

> Caio, eu ja cheguei a fechar com juniper sem maiores problemas também, o
> ping mpls ipv4 partindo da loopback do cisco para a loopback do juniper
> também nao funciona? se nem isso funcionar tem algo de errado no mpls.
>
> []s!
>
> --
> Guilherme de Freitas Figueiredo
>
> 2016-09-29 12:07 GMT-03:00 Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com>:
>
> > Outra dúvida Guilherme, os cenários que você tem com o ME3600X estão
> > fechando o VC direto com Juniper MX ou apenas entre ME3600X ? (esse
> último
> > eu sei que funciona sem segredos)
> >
> > 2016-09-29 11:07 GMT-03:00 Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Guilherme,
> > > Nem o ping pinga, nem o traceroute completa:
> > >
> > > # run traceroute mpls ldp XX.XX.XX.XX
> > >   Probe options: ttl 64, retries 3, wait 10, paths 16, exp 7, fanout 16
> > >
> > >   ttl    Label  Protocol    Address          Previous Hop     Probe
> > Status
> > >     1                       WW.WW.WW.WW  (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     2                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     3                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     4                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     5                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     6                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     7                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > >     8                       (null)           (null)           No reply
> > >
> > > WW.WW.WW.WW é o IP diretamente conectado na interface (não-loopback).
> > >
> > > Você se importa de me dizer qual IOS você está usando nos teus ME3600X
> e
> > > se tiver um cenário parecido, compartilhar a configuração, ou alguma
> > parte
> > > relevante dela que esteja diferente?
> > >
> > > 2016-09-29 10:44 GMT-03:00 Guilherme de Freitas Figueiredo <
> > > guilhermefreitasfigueiredo at gmail.com>:
> > >
> > >>  tenho bastante mpls com 3600 aqui sem nenhum problema, o ping mpls
> ou o
> > >> traceroute mpls para o destino do juniper tem resposta? muito estranho
> > >> essa
> > >> forwarding-table estar sem o destino do prefixo desejado.
> > >>
> > >> []s!
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Guilherme de Freitas Figueiredo
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Guilherme,
> > >> >
> > >> > Service-instance sem bridge domain com xconnect na
> service-instance, a
> > >> CEF
> > >> > está ok, mas a forwarding-table está vazia, o que eu acredito ser
> > >> devido a
> > >> > falha no MPLS Dataplane veja:
> > >> >
> > >> > Local      Outgoing   Prefix           Bytes Label   Outgoing   Next
> > Hop
> > >> >
> > >> > Label      Label      or Tunnel Id     Switched      interface
> > >> > 17         No Label   l2ckt()          0             drop
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Eduardo, segue configuração do serviço, está bem simples (obs: tenho
> > >> outros
> > >> > cenários rodando com exatamente a mesma configuração funcionando ok,
> > >> porém,
> > >> > em outros equipamentos, C2951, etc):
> > >> >
> > >> > Juniper side:
> > >> >
> > >> > set interfaces ge-0/0/0 mtu 1600
> > >> > set interfaces ge-0/0/0 encapsulation ethernet-ccc
> > >> > set interfaces ge-0/0/0 unit 0
> > >> > set protocols l2circuit neighbor XX.XX.XX.XX interface ge-0/0/0.0
> > >> > virtual-circuit-id 2
> > >> > set protocols l2circuit neighbor XX.XX.XX.XX interface ge-0/0/0.0
> > >> > control-word
> > >> > set protocols l2circuit neighbor XX.XX.XX.XX interface ge-0/0/0.0
> mtu
> > >> 1600
> > >> > set protocols l2circuit neighbor XX.XX.XX.XX interface ge-0/0/0.0
> > >> > pseudowire-status-tlv
> > >> > set protocols ldp interface xe-2/0/1.1 transport-address router-id
> > >> > set protocols mpls interface xe-2/0/1.1
> > >> > set protocols ldp egress-policy connected
> > >> > set protocols ldp deaggregate
> > >> > set protocols ldp interface lo0.0 transport-address interface
> > >> > set interfaces lo0 unit 0 family inet address YY.YY.YY.YY/32
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Cisco side:
> > >> >
> > >> > pseudowire-class eompls
> > >> >  encapsulation mpls
> > >> >  control-word
> > >> >
> > >> > interface GigabitEthernet0/1
> > >> >  no switchport
> > >> >  mtu 1600
> > >> >  no ip address
> > >> >  xconnect YY.YY.YY.YY 2 encapsulation mpls pw-class eompls
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > mpls ldp router-id Loopback0 force
> > >> >
> > >> > interface Loopback0
> > >> >  ip address XX.XX.XX.XX 255.255.255.255
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > 2016-09-28 23:42 GMT-03:00 Eduardo Schoedler <listas at esds.com.br>:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Se mandasse a configuração, ficaria muito mais simples de
> > entender...
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Em quarta-feira, 28 de setembro de 2016, Guilherme de Freitas
> > >> Figueiredo
> > >> > <
> > >> > > guilhermefreitasfigueiredo at gmail.com> escreveu:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > como ta a configuração do seu transporte na g0/1 ? service
> > instance
> > >> com
> > >> > > > bridge-domain ? switchport com vlan ? service-instance sem
> bridge
> > >> > domain
> > >> > > e
> > >> > > > xconnect na service instance? a forwarding-table também está
> > >> correta?
> > >> > bem
> > >> > > > como a cef? como fica o traceroute com pacotes mpls para o
> > destino?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > []s!
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > Guilherme de Freitas Figueiredo
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:24 PM, Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com
> > >> > <javascript:;>>
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Rubens,
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Tentei tudo que foi sugerido no post, ainda na mesma.
> > >> > > > > Extraí o debug do VC tentando subir, quem quiser dar uma
> olhada:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Circuit attributes,
> > >> > Receive
> > >> > > > > update:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .  Status: UP (0x1)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .  Alarm: 0x0
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Process attrs
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Receive status
> update
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Receive AC
> > STATUS(UP)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. AC status UP
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... S:Evt local
> up,
> > >> > > > > LrdRruD->LruRruD
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... S:Act send
> > >> > notify(DOWN)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... Send
> > notify(DOWN)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .....  Dataplane :
> > >> > > > > DOWN(pw-tx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .....  Overall   :
> > >> > > > > DOWN(pw-tx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... Send LDP for
> > >> status
> > >> > > > change
> > >> > > > > from DOWN AC(rx/tx faults), (pw-tx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... NMS: VC oper
> > >> state:
> > >> > > > DOWN
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... NMS:     err
> > >> codes:
> > >> > > > > pw-rx-err
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... NMS:
> > >> > :  +
> > >> > > > > dp-err
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... SYSLOG: VC is
> > >> DOWN,
> > >> > PW
> > >> > > > Err
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ... Local ready
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... Local service
> is
> > >> > ready;
> > >> > > > > send a label
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... Alloc local
> > >> binding
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... No need to
> > update
> > >> > the
> > >> > > > > local binding
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... Generate local
> > >> event
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... Ready, label
> 17
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .... Evt local
> ready,
> > >> in
> > >> > > > > activating
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..... Take no
> action
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. Check if can
> > >> activate
> > >> > > > > dataplane
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ... Not activating
> > >> > > dataplane:
> > >> > > > > not establishing
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:19:08.264: AToM: 1631 cumulative msgs handled. rc=0
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Evt dataplane
> > >> reactivate,
> > >> > in
> > >> > > > > activating
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Activate
> dataplane
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Need to setup the
> > >> > > dataplane
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Setup dataplane,
> > >> PWID 1
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. Provision SSM
> with
> > >> PWID
> > >> > > 1,
> > >> > > > VC
> > >> > > > > ID 2, Block ID 0
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. Set imp flags:
> cw
> > ra
> > >> > vcw
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ..              :
> nsf
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. Set segment
> count
> > >> to 1
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. Provision SSM
> with
> > >> > > > 5489/5527
> > >> > > > > (sw/seg)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Receive SSM
> dataplane
> > >> > > > > unavailable notification
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Evt dataplane down,
> > in
> > >> > > > > activating
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Dataplane
> > unavailable
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Set last error:
> > MPLS
> > >> > > > dataplane
> > >> > > > > reported a fault to the nexthop
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. S:Evt dataplane
> > >> fault
> > >> > in
> > >> > > > > LruRruD
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: .. S:Act send
> > >> SSS(DOWN),
> > >> > > > > notify(DOWN)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ...  Dataplane :
> > >> > > > > DOWN(pw-tx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ...  Overall   :
> > >> > > > > DOWN(pw-rx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ...  [filtered AC]
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ... Send
> notify(DOWN)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ...  Dataplane :
> > >> > > > > DOWN(pw-tx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ...  Overall   :
> > >> > > > > DOWN(pw-tx-fault)
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: ...  [filtered LDP]
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: . Notify dataplane
> > down
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Deactivating data
> > plane
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Notify dataplane
> down
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Unprovision and
> > >> deallocate
> > >> > > SSM
> > >> > > > > segment
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Added vc to 60 sec
> > >> retry
> > >> > > queue
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM[XX.XX.XX.XX, 2]: Event provision
> retry
> > >> > > already
> > >> > > > in
> > >> > > > > retry queue
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Sep 28 17:20:06.464: AToM: 1632 cumulative msgs handled. rc=0
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Procurando no Google achei alguns reports de problemas com o
> > >> ME3600X
> > >> > > > usando
> > >> > > > > signaling em BGP, porém estou usando LDP para signaling então
> > não
> > >> > > consigo
> > >> > > > > ver uma relação entre os problemas.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Bom, deixo aí aberto pra quem puder ajudar, QUALQUER ajuda é
> bem
> > >> > vinda.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Abs,
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Caio
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > 2016-09-28 12:50 GMT-03:00 Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com
> > >> <javascript:;>>:
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Rubens,
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Obrigado pela dica, vi algumas coisas que posso tentar nesse
> > >> Post.
> > >> > > > > > Vou testar todas as possibilidades hoje e passo um report
> pra
> > >> > lista.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Abs,
> > >> > > > > > Caio
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Em 28/09/2016 11:43, "Lista" <lista.gter at gmail.com
> > >> <javascript:;>>
> > >> > > > escreveu:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > se funcionar nos reporte, seria interessante o feedback
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > Em 28 de setembro de 2016 07:40, Rubens Kuhl <
> > rubensk at gmail.com
> > >> > > > <javascript:;>>
> > >> > > > > escreveu:
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > http://blog.ipspace.net/2011/11/junos-versus-cisco-ios-
> > >> > > > > mpls-and-ldp.html
> > >> > > > > > > pode dar uma luz...
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > Rubens
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > 2016-09-27 15:05 GMT-03:00 Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com
> > >> > <javascript:;>>:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Senhores,
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Estou com um problema estranho ao tentar subir um
> > >> > > > l2circuit/xconnect
> > >> > > > > > > > interop. entre um MX-104 e um ME3600X.
> > >> > > > > > > > Um detalhe interessante é que tanto no ME3600X quanto no
> > >> MX-104
> > >> > > há
> > >> > > > > > > > l2circuits/xconnects fechados com outros dispositivos
> > >> (outros
> > >> > > > > Junipers
> > >> > > > > > e
> > >> > > > > > > > outros Ciscos como 2951 etc).
> > >> > > > > > > > No lado do MX fica tudo up:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Neighbor: XX.XX.XX.XX
> > >> > > > > > > >     Interface                 Type  St     Time last up
> > >> > > #
> > >> > > > Up
> > >> > > > > > > trans
> > >> > > > > > > >     ge-0/0/0.0(vc 2)          rmt   Up     Sep 27
> 14:54:56
> > >> 2016
> > >> > > > > > >  1
> > >> > > > > > > >       Remote PE: YY.YY.YY.YY, Negotiated control-word:
> Yes
> > >> > (Null)
> > >> > > > > > > >       Incoming label: 300192, Outgoing label: 18
> > >> > > > > > > >       Negotiated PW status TLV: No
> > >> > > > > > > >       Local interface: ge-0/0/0.0, Status: Up,
> > >> Encapsulation:
> > >> > > > > ETHERNET
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Porém do lado do Cisco, não sobe nem na bala:
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Local interface: Gi0/1 up, line protocol up, Ethernet up
> > >> > > > > > > >   Destination address: XX.XX.XX.XX, VC ID: 2, VC status:
> > >> down
> > >> > > > > > > >     Last error: *MPLS dataplane reported a fault to the
> > >> > nexthop*
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > As adjacências estão ok dos dois lados (apesar do Uptime
> > não
> > >> > > > bater):
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > #sh mpls ldp neighbor
> > >> > > > > > > >     Peer LDP Ident: XX.XX.XX.XX:0; Local LDP Ident
> > >> > YY.YY.YY.YY:0
> > >> > > > > > > > TCP connection: XX.XX.XX.XX.646 - 177.21.44.122.23511
> > >> > > > > > > > State: Oper; Msgs sent/rcvd: 62103/54188; Downstream
> > >> > > > > > > > * Up time: 6d07h*
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > > show ldp neighbor YY.YY.YY.YY detail
> > >> > > > > > > > Address            Interface          Label space ID
> > >> >  Hold
> > >> > > > > time
> > >> > > > > > > > YY.YY.YY.YY      lo0.0              YY.YY.YY.YY:0
> > >> 41
> > >> > > > > > > >   Transport address: YY.YY.YY.YY, Configuration
> sequence:
> > 0
> > >> > > > > > > >  * Up for 1w1d 23:35:12*
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Procurei bastante no Google e não achei nada, apenas
> > pessoas
> > >> > com
> > >> > > o
> > >> > > > > > mesmo
> > >> > > > > > > > problema e que aparentemente não conseguiram resolver ou
> > não
> > >> > > > postaram
> > >> > > > > > os
> > >> > > > > > > > resultados.
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Alguém já passou por isso ou sabe o que pode ser?
> > >> > > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > > Desde já agradeço.
> > >> > > > > > > > Abraços.
> > >> > > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/
> > mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> > > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/
> mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > --
> > >> > > > > > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > --
> > >> > > > > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > --
> > >> > > > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > Eduardo Schoedler
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> > >
> > >> > --
> > >> > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >> >
> > >> --
> > >> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
> >
> --
> gter list    https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>



More information about the gter mailing list