I was able to get updated MX code (14.2-20150704.0) and now have
device-manager successfully configuring my MX80. BGP session between MX and
Contrail also seems to be stable now however I am having an issue with
reach-ability between MX and hosts connected to TOR switches. Based on
ititial troubleshooting I don't believe Junos is announcing the EVPN route
for the IRB interface:
oot@gw2z0# show groups __contrail__ interfaces irb
gratuitous-arp-reply;
unit 4 {
family inet {
address 10.10.210.145/29;
}
}
root@gw2z0# run show route advertising-protocol bgp 10.10.210.140
bgp.rtarget.0: 2 destinations, 4 routes (2 active, 0 holddown, 2 hidden)
Prefix Nexthop MED Lclpref AS path
65412:65412:1/96
* Self 100 I
65412:65412:8000001/96
* Self 100 I
IRB interface is up:
root@gw2z0# run show interfaces routing | grep irb
irb.4 Up INET 10.10.210.145
root@gw2z0# run show route 10.10.210.145
_contrail_l3_4_Test.inet.0: 2 destinations, 3 routes (2 active, 0 holddown,
0 hidden)
+ = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both
10.10.210.145/32 *[Local/0] 00:02:51
Local via irb.4
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Nischal Sheth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/juniperopenstack/+bug/1465070
>
> -Nischal
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 4, 2015, at 11:04 AM, Dan Houtz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Great! Next question...
>
> Are there plans to add in ability to apply the 'virtual-gateway-address'
> knob when configuring IRBs? I believe this is the recommended way to
> configure redundant MX gateways correct?
>
> -Dan
>
> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 9:15 AM, Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Yes…this should be addressed too.
>>
>> Vedu
>>
>> From: Dan Houtz <[email protected]>
>> Date: Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 7:38 PM
>> To: Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <[email protected]>
>> Cc: OpenContrail Users List - 2 <[email protected]>
>> Subject: Re: [Users] Problem with Device Manager's VXLAN config in
>> Contrail 2.2
>>
>> Vedu,
>>
>> Thank you for the information. I have reached out to our SE to see
>> about getting updated code. I am also seeing the following with BGP
>> sessions between Contrail and MX since moving to 2.2:
>>
>> Jul 4 14:06:47 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: RPD_BGP_NEIGHBOR_STATE_CHANGED: BGP
>> peer 10.10.210.140 (Internal AS 65412) changed state from OpenConfirm to
>> Established (event RecvKeepAlive) (instance master)
>> Jul 4 14:06:47 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: bgp_read_v4_update:10535: NOTIFICATION
>> sent to 10.10.210.140 (Internal AS 65412): code 3 (Update Message Error)
>> subcode 9 (error with optional attribute), Data: c0 16 09 10 fc 00
>> Jul 4 14:06:47 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: RPD_BGP_NEIGHBOR_STATE_CHANGED: BGP
>> peer 10.10.210.140 (Internal AS 65412) changed state from Established to
>> Idle (event RecvUpdate) (instance master)
>> Jul 4 14:06:47 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: Received malformed update from
>> 10.10.210.140 (Internal AS 65412)
>> Jul 4 14:06:47 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: Family evpn, prefix 3:10.10.210.140:1
>> ::4::10.10.214.65/152
>> Jul 4 14:06:47 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: Malformed Attribute PMSI(22) flag
>> 0xc0 length 9.
>> Jul 4 14:06:52 gw2z0 rpd[86503]: bgp_parse_open_options: peer
>> 10.10.210.140+50620 (proto): unsupported AF 1 SAFI 243
>>
>> Is this something that will also be fixed with the new MX code?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Dan
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 8:02 AM, Vedamurthy Ananth Joshi <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Dan,
>>> Ingress-node-replication was not pushed by Device Manager on purpose.
>>> The corresponding MX image could be any daily build equal to or greater
>>> than 14.2-20150627.0.
>>>
>>> Vedu
>>>
>>> From: Dan Houtz <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Saturday, July 4, 2015 at 1:47 PM
>>> To: OpenContrail Users List - 2 <[email protected]>
>>> Subject: [Users] Problem with Device Manager's VXLAN config in Contrail
>>> 2.2
>>>
>>> Has anyone else tried configuring EVPN VXLAN on an MX using device
>>> manager in Contrail 2.2? In my testing the configuration being pushed my
>>> netconf is not valid:
>>>
>>> root@gw2z0# commit check
>>> [edit routing-instances _contrail_l2_4_Test bridge-domains bd-4]
>>> 'vxlan'
>>> multicast-group or ovsdb-managed or ingress-node-replication should
>>> be enabled
>>> error: configuration check-out failed: (statements constraint check
>>> failed)
>>>
>>> To fix this you must manually configure ingress-node-replication:
>>>
>>> root@gw2z0# set groups __contrail__ routing-instances
>>> _contrail_l2_4_Test bridge-domains bd-4 vxlan ingress-node-replication
>>>
>>> root@gw2z0# commit check
>>> configuration check succeeds
>>>
>>> Is this possibly MX junos version specific? I am using a daily build
>>> given to me by my SE as I don't believe any released versions support VXLAN:
>>>
>>> root@gw2z0# run show version
>>> Hostname: gw2z0
>>> Model: mx80-48t
>>> Junos: 14.2-20150527_rpd_v2_evpn_vnid.0
>>>
>>> I doubt it matters but it's also odd that device manager is applying
>>> this since I'm using VXLAN:
>>>
>>> root@gw2z0# show groups __contrail__ protocols mpls
>>> interface all;
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Dan
>>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/users_lists.opencontrail.org
>
>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/users_lists.opencontrail.org
