I have almost this same configuration working between a 7600 with ES+ cards and an ASR9K. It took me forever to get this working but I finally found a TAC engineer who knew what he was doing. We ended up having to put a static route in the ASR9K pointing to the terminating IP of the 7600. LDP would not come up until we did this even though everything looked fine on the 7600. I can share configs if you would like.
Thanks, Shane -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Aivars Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 3:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS routed pseudowire between ASR9k and 7600 with LAN cards I am not sure what that means either. This is just what 7600 showed on debug. Targeted LDP is configured and up on both. This was my first thought too when I saw the message. Aivars >> XCL2 Failed to find session for peer 192.168.0.2, vcid 555 > -not sure what you mean by that please. Do you mean the targeted LDP > session was not formed? > Does the ASR shows that the targeted LDP session is up please? > adam > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Aivars > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:18 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS routed pseudowire between ASR9k and 7600 > with LAN cards > Just a little additional information. > Debug on 7600 shows: > XCL2 Failed to find session for peer 192.168.0.2, vcid 555 > ASR is running 4.3.0 and 7600 122-33.SRE7a. > So far I have not succeeded to bring up a working remote L2VPN session > on ASR (also without L3 interface). Even if it shows up at both ends, > it does not mean that it is working. > Aivars >> Hi, >> >> There is a need to extend L2 connections from an existing 7600 with >> LAN cards to a new ASR9001 and configure IP address on that connection. >> >> If we look for link redundancy and rule out conventional switching >> and spanning tree, to my understanding this looks something like >> "Pseudowire > Headend". >> >> >> ASR9k: >> l2vpn >> xconnect group test >> p2p test >> interface PW-Ether555 >> neighbor 192.168.0.1 pw-id 555 >> >> interface PW-Ether555 >> mtu 9216 >> vrf MGMT >> ipv4 address 172.30.2.1 255.255.255.252 >> attach generic-interface-list test >> >> generic-interface-list test >> interface Bundle-Ether1 >> interface TenGigE0/0/0/1 >> >> 7600: >> interface TenGigabitEthernet3/4.555 >> encapsulation dot1Q 555 >> xconnect 192.168.0.2 555 encapsulation mpls >> mtu 9202 >> >> The problem here is that ASR thinks that everything is fine: >> >> Group test, XC test, state is up; Interworking none >> AC: PW-Ether555, state is up >> Type PW-Ether >> Interface-list: test >> Replicate status: >> Te0/0/0/1: success >> BE1: success >> MTU 9202; interworking none >> Internal label: 16020 >> Statistics: >> packets: received 0, sent 60 >> bytes: received 0, sent 2532 >> PW: neighbor >> 192.168.0.1 >> , PW ID 555, state is up ( established ) >> PW class not set, XC ID 0xc0000001 >> Encapsulation MPLS, protocol LDP >> Source address 172.30.0.2 >> PW type Ethernet, control word disabled, interworking none >> PW backup disable delay 0 sec >> Sequencing not set >> >> PW Status TLV in use >> MPLS Local Remote >> ------------ ------------------------------ >> ----------------------------- >> Label 16021 45 >> Group ID 0x160 0x0 >> Interface PW-Ether555 unknown >> MTU 9202 9202 >> Control word disabled disabled >> PW type Ethernet Ethernet >> VCCV CV type 0x2 0x2 >> (LSP ping verification) (LSP ping verification) >> VCCV CC type 0x6 0x6 >> (router alert label) (router alert label) >> (TTL expiry) (TTL expiry) >> ------------ ------------------------------ >> ----------------------------- >> Incoming Status (PW Status TLV): >> Status code: 0x0 (Up) in Notification message >> Outgoing Status (PW Status TLV): >> Status code: 0x0 (Up) in Notification message >> MIB cpwVcIndex: 3221225473 >> Create time: 19/02/2013 08:51:23 (07:59:29 ago) >> Last time status changed: 19/02/2013 16:50:00 (00:00:52 ago) >> Last time PW went down: 19/02/2013 09:05:10 (07:45:42 ago) >> Statistics: >> packets: received 0, sent 60 >> bytes: received 0, sent 2532 >> >> However at the same time 7600 is unhappy: >> >> BIP-STO1#sh xconnect int te3/4.555 detail >> Legend: XC ST=Xconnect State S1=Segment1 State S2=Segment2 State >> UP=Up DN=Down AD=Admin Down IA=Inactive >> SB=Standby HS=Hot Standby RV=Recovering NH=No Hardware >> >> XC ST Segment 1 S1 Segment 2 S2 >> > ------+---------------------------------+--+-------------------------- > ------+---------------------------------+--+------ > -+-- >> DN ac Te3/4.555:555(Eth VLAN) UP mpls 192.168.0.2:555 DN >> Interworking: ethernet Local VC label 45 >> Remote VC label 16021 >> >> What am I missing here? Is this even the right approach to reach the goal? >> >> I succeeded in a similar task where there was HP 5800 at the other >> end of L2 circuit. I used bridge domain, VPLS and BVI interface in >> that case. Unfortunately VPLS is not an option for 7600 with LAN cards. >> _______________________________________________ >> 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/ _______________________________________________ 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/
