Hi, Thanks for this hint. Indeed I didn't enabled per packer load balancing. Hovewer additional config which I mentioned earlier is needed to enable ECMP.
set routing-instances VRF-6-public routing-options rib VRF-6-public.inet.0 multipath As far as I understand this is because we have routes with different RD http://www.juniper.net/documentation/en_US/junos14.1/topics/usage-guidelines/vpns-configuring-protocol-independent-load-balancing-in-layer-3-vpns.html Hope this helps in the future. On 27 August 2015 at 19:29, Nischal Sheth <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Piotr, > > The configuration would be something like: > > root@mx# show | compare > [edit routing-options] > + forwarding-table { > + export pplb; > + } > [edit] > + policy-options { > + policy-statement pplb { > + then { > + load-balance per-packet; > + } > + } > + } > > [edit] > > -Nischal > > On Aug 27, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Pedro Marques <[email protected]> wrote: > > Piotr, > As far as i can understand this is unrelated to contrail. > > The EX9200 needs to be configured to do load balancing. If i recall > correctly, this configuration is performed in the master routing instance. > > i.e. > "set forwarding-options load-balance per-packet” > should be what you are looking for. > > On Aug 27, 2015, at 6:49 AM, Piotr P <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi > I'm trying to do load balancing for service instances. Those instances > will be accessed externally so this traffic will be delivered via gateway. > > My setup is based on configuration dedicated for MX gateway covered in > document : > > http://www.opencontrail.org/how-to-setup-opencontrail-gateway-juniper-mx-cisco-asr-and-software-gw/ > > My setup consists of Gateway EX9200 with Junos 14.2R3.8 and Contrail 2.20 > (build 64) > > I'm seeing multiple paths announced by controllers. However there is no > performed ECMP like for other paths from OSPF/BGP. > > >show route table VRF-7-public 10.11.12.11/32 > 10.11.12.11/32 *[BGP/170] 00:17:46, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.12 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > [BGP/170] 00:17:46, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.1 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > [BGP/170] 00:17:46, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.1 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32774, Push 33 > [BGP/170] 00:17:46, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.2 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32774, Push 33 > [BGP/170] 00:17:46, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.3 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > [BGP/170] 00:17:46, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.3 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32774, Push 33 > > > > >show route forwarding-table table VRF-7-public matching 10.11.12.11/32 > Routing table: VRF-7-public.inet > Internet: > Destination Type RtRef Next hop Type Index NhRef Netif > 10.11.12.11/32 user 0 indr 1048659 6 > Push 35 1149 2 > gr-0/3/0.32772 > > > After adding following command under RI configuration for second VRF. > Situation slightly changes > > set routing-instances VRF-6-public routing-options rib VRF-6-public.inet.0 > multipath > > > >show route table VRF-6-public 10.11.12.251/32 > > VRF-6-public.inet.0: 9 destinations, 42 routes (9 active, 0 holddown, 0 > hidden) > @ = Routing Use Only, # = Forwarding Use Only > + = Active Route, - = Last Active, * = Both > > 10.11.12.251/32 @[BGP/170] 02:05:30, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.2 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32775, Push 23 > [BGP/170] 02:05:29, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.1 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32775, Push 23 > [BGP/170] 02:05:29, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.1 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > [BGP/170] 02:05:30, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.2 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > [BGP/170] 02:05:30, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.3 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32775, Push 23 > [BGP/170] 02:05:30, localpref 100, from 10.10.10.3 > AS path: 64799 ?, validation-state: unverified > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > #[Multipath/255] 01:00:09, metric2 0 > via gr-0/3/0.32775, Push 23 > > via gr-0/3/0.32772, Push 35 > > Unfortunately Still I can see only one path in forwarding table. > > >show route forwarding-table table VRF-6-public matching 10.11.12.251/32 > Routing table: VRF-6-public.inet > Internet: > Destination Type RtRef Next hop Type Index NhRef Netif > 10.11.12.251/32 user 0 indr 1048674 5 > Push 35 1180 2 > gr-0/3/0.32772 > > > > Also I've tried add additional following configuration but there is no > change in behaviour > > > set routing-instances VRF-6-public forwarding-options load-balance > indexed-load-balance > set routing-instances VRF-6-public forwarding-options load-balance > per-flow hash-seed > set routing-instances VRF-6-public forwarding-options > load-balance-label-capability > > > Does anyone has working example of ECMP on a gateway level for IP inside > Contrail VN ? > > > Regards > Piotr Pieprzycki > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > >
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencontrail.org/mailman/listinfo/users_lists.opencontrail.org
