[GTER] l2circuit/xconnect entre MX-104 e ME3600X
Caio
caiot5 at gmail.com
Thu Sep 29 17:53:30 -03 2016
Eduardo,
OSPF.
2016-09-29 17:46 GMT-03:00 Eduardo Schoedler <listas at esds.com.br>:
> Qual IGP você está rodando?
> Não vi na sua configuração.
>
>
> 2016-09-29 16:34 GMT-03:00 Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com>:
> > 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
> >>
> > --
> > gter list https://eng.registro.br/mailman/listinfo/gter
>
>
>
> --
> Eduardo Schoedler
>
More information about the gter
mailing list