[GTER] l2circuit/xconnect entre MX-104 e ME3600X
Caio
caiot5 at gmail.com
Fri Sep 30 12:30:28 -03 2016
Eles estão diretamente conectados.
E sim, a adjacência ldp subiu normalmente.
2016-09-30 12:04 GMT-03:00 Lista <lista.gter at gmail.com>:
> pelo que entendi eles não estão diretamente conectados, neste caso o ME
> está trocando o ldp com o vizinho, digo o protocolo mpls entre eles estão
> ok?
>
> Em 30 de setembro de 2016 11:20, Caio <caiot5 at gmail.com> escreveu:
>
> > Oi Rafael,
> > Testei sem PHP agora que tu mencionou, mesmo assim não vai.
> >
> > A forwarding-table no MX104 está correta, no ME3600X tá tudo zoado,
> > inclusive a forwarding table.
> >
> > Acabei de atualizar a versão do ME pra última que eu achei disponível
> 15.4
> > e nada também.
> >
> > Não há manipulação de next-hop e não entendi tua última pergunta, como
> > assim finalizando a redistribuição da lo em uma rede de trânsito ?
> >
> > 2016-09-29 20:35 GMT-03:00 Rafael Ganascim <rganascim at gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Já tentou desativar o PHP dos PEs?
> > >
> > > Ao olhar a forwarding - table e label ids de cada um dos roteadores
> eles
> > > estão corretos para a lo de cada um deles?
> > >
> > > Esta havendo alguma manipulação de next hop, ou ainda uma
> redistribuição
> > da
> > > lo com o nexthop finalizando em uma rede de trânsito ?
> > >
> > > Abs,
> > >
> > > Em 29/09/2016 19:54, "Caio" <caiot5 at gmail.com> escreveu:
> > >
> > > > @Guilherme
> > > > Diretamente conectados
> > > >
> > > > @Lista
> > > > As loopbacks se pingam em L3, sobem a adjacência normal, mas não se
> > > pingam
> > > > tentando pingar diretamente a FEC (ping mpls).
> > > >
> > > > 2016-09-29 17:00 GMT-03:00 Lista <lista.gter at gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > > Se suas loopbacks não pinga entre si, verifica se seu protocolo de
> > base
> > > > de
> > > > > distribuição das rotas estão devidamente conectados e propagando as
> > > rotas
> > > > > com os neighboors, sendo assim, uma vez vc pingando eles via
> camada 3
> > > > > normal, vc conseguirá estabelecer suas adjacencias via mpls.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 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
> > > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > 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