Static, RIP, EIGRP, OSPF, BGP, IBGP, IS-IS and any other routing.
Im trying to get a PW to interconnect 2 vlan interfaces. The routers are 7609-s with ES+ cards: Mod Ports Card Type Model --- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------ 1 4 7600 ES+ 7600-ES+4TG3C 2 4 7600 ES+ 7600-ES+4TG3C 5 2 Route Switch Processor 720 Active RSP720-3C-GE 6 2 Route Switch Processor 720 (Hot) RSP720-3C-GE 7 6 Firewall Module WS-SVC-FWM-1 I configure the vlan with an xconnect, no error reported during the configuration. But the xconnect dosent come up. XC ST Segment 1 S1 Segment 2 S2------+---------------------------------+--+---------------------------------+--DN ac Vl10:10(Eth VLAN) UP mpls 10.255.255.1:101 DNDN ac Vl11:11(Eth VLAN) UP mpls 10.255.255.1:203 DN The vlan is up and active, and reading through all the relevant comments on this support forum say this should work. I have the correct hardware (ES+ cards) I also have found exampls on cisoc.com which show this working, it couldnt get much simpler!If I configure the xconnect between active gigabit interfaces it comes straight up. The feature navigator indicates this is supported, and Im told it should work, but it dosent. Any one got any ideas, cos Im struggling. This is a debug from the router, it seems to indicate a session error, but not sure why. Jan 26 18:21:18.371: MPLS peer 10.255.255.1 vcid 101, VC UP, VC state UP*Jan 26 18:21:18.371: XC L2TP: Failed to find session for peer 10.255.255.1, vcid 101*Jan 26 18:21:18.471: MPLS peer 10.255.255.1 vcid 101, VC DOWN, VC state DOWN*Jan 26 18:21:18.471: XC L2TP: Failed to find session for peer 10.255.255.1, vcid 101
Hi, thanks for your reply. The configuration Ive used is the same as I would use on a physical interface, int vl 10xconnect 10.255.255.1 1010 encapsulation mpls If I configure the same on a physical port and no shut the interfaces the xconnect comes straight up, so Im sure the underlying MPLS is ok. This is done on the same nodes where I configured the vlan xconnect. I am thinking this may be a code issue as Ive seen examples of this type of configuration, and Im told it should work.
Well, if its PW, then enable detailed status messages: pseudowire-class PWCLASS encapsulation mpls status int vl 10xconnect 10.255.255.1 1010 pw PWCLASS After that, look at the detailed status:show mpls l2transport vc 1010 detailUsually i come into contact with LFI or Service Instance constructs E.g.:(define service instance under ES interface)service instance 1 ethernetencapsulation dot1q 10rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetricxconnect IP_ADDRESS 50 pw-class eompls
Hi, Just tried your suggestion using the PWCLASS, I had tried this before but not included the status keyword. However, when I look at the output of show mpls l2transport vc 1010 detail I see that there was nothing under the outgoing interface,and no labels. Checking my config, the link between the 2 nodes is a port channel, I had mpls enabled on the channel, but not on the physical ports, so tried this, didn’t make any difference. In the network I also have just built a redundant path via a 3rd node. As part of the debugging work I shut down the port channel. The xconnect established over the redundant path. This is really odd, as I already had a vrf working across the port-channel, before I built the redundant path, so I thought the MPLS was running ok, now Im not so sure. It now looks that the xconnect won work across a port channel, although Im not aware of any restrictions regarding this. Am doing more work on this. Do I need to include the service instance as well? Im just reading up on this.