[GTER] l2circuit/xconnect entre MX-104 e ME3600X
Eduardo Schoedler
listas at esds.com.br
Thu Sep 29 17:11:41 -03 2016
Qual IGP você está rodando?
Não vi na sua configuração.
Em quinta-feira, 29 de setembro de 2016, Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com> escreveu:
> 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 <javascript:;>>:
>
> > 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 <javascript:;>>:
> >
> > > 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 <javascript:;>>:
> > >
> > > > 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 <javascript:;>>:
> > > >
> > > >> 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
> <javascript:;>> 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
> <javascript:;>>:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > 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 <javascript:;>> 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:;>
> > > >> > <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:;>
> > > >> <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:;>
> > > >> <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:;>
> > > >> > > > <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:;>
> > > >> > <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
> >
> --
> gter list https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
--
Eduardo Schoedler
More information about the gter
mailing list