07-20-2012 02:41 AM
Hello,
Im trying to get CSC Inter-AS working between ios (c1900-universalk9-mz.SPA.151-4.M4.bin) and ios-xr ( asr9000 4.1.0 ) and I'm unable to get it working. The end result is a CE running MPLS to xconnect into a asr9k för h-vpls type setup.
The L2VPN config is verified before by putting the CE into our IGP and everything works. However when wanting to use ebgp it falls apart:
Currently it is configured like this:
IOS CE:
interface Loopback0
ip address x.x.x.127 255.255.255.255
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0.1549
encapsulation dot1Q 1549
ip address x.x.x.4 255.255.255.254
mpls bgp forwarding
mpls label protocol ldp
mpls ip
router bgp 64515
bgp router-id x.x.x.127
bgp always-compare-med
bgp log-neighbor-changes
neighbor x.x.x.5 remote-as 34244
!
address-family ipv4
network x.x.x.127 mask 255.255.255.255
neighbor x.x.x.5 activate
neighbor x.x.x.5 prefix-list x in
neighbor x.x.x.5 prefix-list x out
neighbor x.x.x.5 send-label
exit-address-family
!
address-family vpnv4
exit-address-family
!
mpls ldp router-id Loopback0 force
on P router:
interface Loopback0
ipv4 address x.x.x.120 255.255.255.255
!
router bgp 34244
bgp router-id x.x.x.120
bgp log neighbor changes detail
address-family ipv4 unicast
redistribute connected route-policy IPV4-CONNECTED-TO-BGP
redistribute static route-policy IPV4-STATIC-TO-BGP
allocate-label all
neighbor x.x.x.4
remote-as 64515
address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
route-policy x in
route-policy x out
send-extended-community-ebgp
!
mpls ldp
router-id loopback0
interface gi0/1/0/15.1549
!
and the BGP seems to be working fine:
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:rtr10.sjo#show bgp nei x.x.x.4
Fri Jul 20 11:30:37.769 METDST
BGP neighbor is x.x.x.4
Remote AS 64515, local AS 34244, external link
Remote router ID x.x.x.127
BGP state = Established, up for 19:26:04
Last read 00:00:34, Last read before reset 00:00:00
Hold time is 180, keepalive interval is 60 seconds
Configured hold time: 180, keepalive: 60, min acceptable hold time: 3
Last write 00:00:06, attempted 19, written 19
Second last write 00:01:06, attempted 19, written 19
Last write before reset 00:00:00, attempted 0, written 0
Second last write before reset 00:00:00, attempted 0, written 0
Last write pulse rcvd Jul 20 11:30:31.302 last full not set pulse count 2458
Last write pulse rcvd before reset 00:00:00
Socket not armed for io, armed for read, armed for write
Last write thread event before reset 00:00:00, second last 00:00:00
Last KA expiry before reset 00:00:00, second last 00:00:00
Last KA error before reset 00:00:00, KA not sent 00:00:00
Last KA start before reset 00:00:00, second last 00:00:00
Precedence: internet
Enforcing first AS is enabled
Neighbor capabilities:
Route refresh: advertised and received
4-byte AS: advertised and received
Address family IPv4 Labeled-unicast: advertised and received
Received 1285 messages, 0 notifications, 0 in queue
Sent 1174 messages, 0 notifications, 0 in queue
Minimum time between advertisement runs is 30 secs
For Address Family: IPv4 Labeled-unicast
BGP neighbor version 145723894
Update group: 0.1 Filter-group: 0.6 No Refresh request being processed
Extended community attribute sent to this neighbor
Route refresh request: received 0, sent 1
Policy for incoming advertisements is
Policy for outgoing advertisements is 1 accepted prefixes, 1 are bestpaths
Cumulative no. of prefixes denied: 0.
Prefix advertised 107, suppressed 0, withdrawn 3
Maximum prefixes allowed 131072
Threshold for warning message 75%, restart interval 0 min
An EoR was not received during read-only mode
Last ack version 145723894, Last synced ack version 0
Outstanding version objects: current 0, max 2
Additional-paths operation: None
Connections established 1; dropped 0
Local host: x.x.x.5, Local port: 179
Foreign host: x.x.x.4, Foreign port: 40925
Last reset 00:00:00
and all the routes look good etc.
But when I look in CEF:
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:rtr10.sjo#show cef x.x.x.127/32
Fri Jul 20 11:33:31.282 METDST
x.x.x.127/32, version 18, drop adjacency, internal 0x4004001 (ptr 0xae650834) [1], 0x0 (0xace7ba70), 0x0 (0xadf366c0)
Updated Jul 19 16:24:29.011
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence routine (0)
via x.x.x.4, 0 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext [flags 0x20]
path-idx 0
unresolved
local label 16131
it does not seem able to resolve? Which is probably the reason it does not work?
Or have I missed any configuration, do anyone have a working ios-xr 4.1.0 ios inter-as setup working and can share the configuration?
Any hint is appreciated!
07-05-2014 03:44 AM
I have similar problem. Did you manage to resolve the BGP-LU prefixes received over eBGP session? In my case as well all looks OK (eBGP LU session up, prefixes with labels exchanged, routing table looks OK), with the exception of CEF:
RP/0/0/CPU0:02-ASBR2#show cef 172.16.20.2/32 detail
Thu Jul 3 14:48:04.746 UTC
172.16.20.2/32, version 393, drop adjacency, internal 0x4004001 0x0 (ptr 0xacba7fa4) [1], 0x0 (0xacba2640), 0x10 (0xacc33754)
Updated Jul 3 14:14:07.206
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
gateway array (0xacb63e7c) reference count 18, flags 0xf2, source rib (6), 0 backups
[7 type 5 flags 0x210101 (0xacc38048) ext 0x0 (0x0)]
LW-LDI[type=5, refc=3, ptr=0xacba2640, sh-ldi=0xacc38048]
via 10.9.0.3, 0 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext [flags 0x6020]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xacb0ad08 0x0]
unresolved
local label 16016
labels imposed {16001}
Load distribution: 0 (refcount 7)
Hash OK Interface Address
0 Y Unknown drop
07-09-2014 06:29 PM
Generally, Cisco software requires a /32 route for each next-hop that should be label switched. In the CSC/Inter-AS B/C options, in IOS-XR you must add manually a /32 static route for the peer address of the interconnection in order to create a label for that. IOS creates automatically a /32 connected route when the relevant VPNv4 or labeled BGP session comes up.
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k_r4-2/lxvpn/configuration/guide/vcasr9kv342/vcasr9k42v3.html#wp1289643
Configuring a Static Route to a Peer
Perform this task to configure a static route to an Inter-AS or CSC-CE peer.
When you configure an Inter-AS or CSC peer, BGP allocates a label for a /32 route to that peer and performs a NULL label rewrite. When forwarding a labeled packet to the peer, the router removes the top label from the label stack; however, in such an instance, BGP expects a /32 route to the peer. This task ensures that there is, in fact, a /32 route to the peer.
Please be aware of these facts before performing this task:
•A /32 route is not required to establish BGP peering. A route using a shorter prefix length will also work.
•A shorter prefix length route is not associated with the allocated label; even though the BGP session comes up between the peers, without the static route, forwarding will not work.
Best Regards,
Bheem
07-10-2014 09:54 AM
Yes. Figured out in the mean time. Thanks a lot.
07-10-2014 10:25 AM
You are very welcome!
Best Regards,
Bheem
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide