We haven't faced any issues with the following (ASR920 with 15.6(2)SP6): interface Port-channel1 service instance 100 ethernet encapsulation untagged l2protocol peer cdp lacp udld ! service instance 501 ethernet encapsulation dot1q x ! service instance 502 ethernet encapsulation dot1q y
-- Tassos Eric Van Tol wrote on 20/8/20 21:12: > Hi all, > I’m trying to verify something here that is working, but also not working. At > some point, we built an LACP bundle to a customer device (2x1G ports) and put > it into an EoMPLS setup using xconnect to send it over to another site where > they have a 10G single circuit. While the LAG is ‘up’ and passing traffic, > the ports continuously get removed from the bundle and added back in and > there’s obviously a small amount of packet loss that occurs when that happens. > > ‘l2protocol peer lacp’ is configured on the Po1 service-instance and the > behavior is the same whether that command is there or not. My inclination is > to say that this should not work at all, but given that the bundle was > operational and not flapping when someone turned it up, it was considered to > be working. > > To confuse matters even more, customer switch on the other side is configured > with native VLAN 2, but I’m not entirely sure that matters if the overall > config isn’t even supported. > > Hardware: ASR920-12CZ-A > Version: 03.16.04.S > > Interface configs: > > interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0 > mtu 1600 > no ip address > load-interval 30 > negotiation auto > channel-group 1 mode active > ! > > interface GigabitEthernet0/0/1 > mtu 1600 > no ip address > load-interval 30 > negotiation auto > channel-group 1 mode active > ! > interface Port-channel1 > mtu 1600 > no ip address > load-interval 30 > negotiation auto > no keepalive > service instance 1 ethernet > encapsulation default > l2protocol peer lacp > xconnect x.x.x.x 1234 encapsulation mpls pw-class Raw-Mode-VC5 > mtu 1600 > ! > > If this is confirmed as unsupported, would I be correct in that we would have > to separate out the untagged native VLAN into its own, non-xconnect EFP, so > as to do proper ‘l2protocol peer’ configuration? My only concern there is > that the native VLAN needs to be transported along with all other VLANs to > the other end of the xconnect so I am not sure right now how we do that, or > if we even can. > > -evt > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
