Yes you are right - the cost of the SIP interface is lower than the Lan card Also, I already have a "mpls ldp router-id Loopback0", which is used for other purposes . AFAIK only one loopback can participate in ldp interaction.
If I have correctly understood you are offering to implement one more "normal" igp-related mpls+ip topology. How it is possibly? 2010/6/15 <[email protected]> > You will need to adjust igp cost so that your signaling/sourcing PE router > issues/sends tldp via the sip-based interface towards the far-end vpls > speakers' loopback address. It would seem that your device is picking a link > that's lower cost (via the 10 gig card) which cannot allocate labels for > vpls vfi vc's. > > You may also want to assign and deploy a second set of loopbacks on your > devices, specifically for use in signaling (and costing/adjusting via an igp > or ibgp) vpls vfi setup. A different target (loopback) will permit you to > run a "normal" igp-related mpls+ip topology alongside a slightly different > one, with tweaks you apply so that tldp sessions for vfis take different > links/egress paths. > > The pfc3 will not (read: cannot) allocate labels which terminate to a local > vfi *and* which have a P-facing link on a LAN card. The pfc3 only supports > allocating labels for vfi's that have p-facing links which terminate on > sip+spa, ES, or OSM+ line cards, and of course p2p eompls vc's. The pfc3 > will be fine with acting as a P device for both lan cards and wan cards. The > issue you are seeing occurs only when the device is acting as a vfi PE and > when you wish to run P-facing links on lan ports. > > -Tk > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anrey Teslenko <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 12:43:56 > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] H-VPLS BGP autodiscovery > > Whether somebody can answer my question? > Help me please, If you had the same problem > > 2010/6/11 Anrey Teslenko <[email protected]> > > > Hello all, > > > > Does anyone have the experience in configuration of H-VPLS, using BGP as > > discovery mechanism? > > > > I try to implement this in my network. Everything works fine, but there > are > > some problems. > > I tune H-VPLS on cisco 7600 series with SIP-400 as uplink and downlink > > interfaces. > > I have trouble, when router has two uplinks interfaces - the first on Sip > > 400 and the second on a LAN card > > Detailed output is as follows for my VFI > > > > Local interface: VFI test VFI up > > MPLS VC type is VFI, interworking type is Ethernet > > Destination address: xx.xx.xx.xx, VC ID: 500, VC status: up > > Output interface: none, imposed label stack {302 295} > > Preferred path: not configured > > Default path: active > > Next hop: Invalid ADDR > > > > As result LDP signaling works fine, BGP autodiscovery works fine, however > > pseudo wire has not found outgoing interface > > Manual configuration of VFI allows to apply pseudoware-class with > > preferred-path, but this configuration is poorly scalable > > However in autodiscovery mode I couldn't apply preferred-path (Cisco > say: > > "Tunnel selection is not supported with autodiscovered neighbors.") > > > > So my question is: How to properly select output interface (SIP 400 > instead > > WS-X6704-10GE), configuring of H-VPLS and using BGP autodiscovery? > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
