Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for
- Cisco Community
- :
- About Mohammed Imran Khan
Stats
Member since
06-16-2011
34
Posts
19
Helpful
5
Solutions
Created by
Mohammed Imran Khan
in Routing
in Routing
01-10-2014
06:16 AM
01-10-2014
06:16 AM
Hello Iulian, "wan-mz" means support for WAN modules. In addition, these are the unique features in s72033-adventerprisek9_wan-mz.122-33.SXJ6.bin : IPXWAN 2.0 IPX Access List Plain English Filters IPX Access Control List Violation Logging DLSw (RFC 1795) BSTUN (Block Serial Tunneling) DLSw+ Asynchronous TCP Enhancements DLSw+ Border Peer Caching LAN Network Manager over DLSw+ SRB - Source-Route bridging HTH Regards, Imran
... View more
01-05-2014
09:36 PM
Thanks Rolf! :-) Mohamed, I am glad issue is resolved now. Regards, Imran
... View more
01-05-2014
12:41 AM
Hello Mohamed, Can you please confirm what you are unable to ping? CE-CE? Is PE-PE pingable (both vrf and LSP)? If CE-CE is not pinging (but LSP is up and PE-PE vrf routes are pinging) then try this on PE: router rip ! address-family ipv4 vrf cust_b redistribute bgp 1 >>>> network 10.0.0.0 no auto-summary version 2 exit-address-family Regards, Imran
... View more
09-25-2013
09:24 AM
Hello Arun, Not sure if I hae understood your prolem correctly. Does the solution include running "eBGP" P2 ASBR (NNI) and PE2? Shouldn't this be ibgp? Can you please confirm this. Second thing is if you are having a default route in the "core", my understanding is that you will see the label bindings in the control plane, but forwarding plane will actually show nothing. You can confirm this by this command: show mpls ldp bindings show mpls forwarding /Imran
... View more
Created by
Mohammed Imran Khan
in Routing
in Routing
09-23-2013
06:49 AM
09-23-2013
06:49 AM
Thanks Sandeep! That was a clear and lucid explanation. It was helpful!!! /Imran
... View more
Created by
Mohammed Imran Khan
in Routing
in Routing
09-23-2013
05:05 AM
09-23-2013
05:05 AM
Hello Sandeep Sir, Just wanted to know what is a BGP slow-peer and what ar/is the way to mitigate this issue. /Imran
... View more
09-17-2013
02:27 PM
Hello Juan, Can you please paste the output of following: show ip bgp vpnv4 all summary show ip bgp vpnv4 all label and the output of "show run | b router bgp" /Imran
... View more
09-17-2013
09:39 AM
Hello Juan, was this box running on 153-2.S2 when the issue happened. Are you still facing the issue after reload? /Imran
... View more
08-15-2013
10:17 PM
Hello Ayush, sorry for the delay I was on leave. 3. Label are associated with each interface, hence when a VPN service is created in PE, we need it to associated with all the interfaces configured with ldp ? >> You do not need to enable the ldp on core interfaces if you are running mpls TE. Using its signaling element, RSVP-TE sets up an LSP end-to-end (ingress-to-egress). So label distribution is coordinated among all the LSRs along a path. LDP, on the other hand, has no signaling element. It sets up LSPs hop-by-hop, and labels can be distributed between neighbors independently of what other LSRs along the path are doing. Because it has no signaling element, LDP depends on the network's IGP to determine the path an LSP must take, whereas RSVP-TE can set up paths independently of what the IGP determines to be the optimal path to a destination - hence the Traffic Engineering part of the protocol. When you use the TE tunnel starting from PE, make sure to use "autoroute announce". This will make sure that the outgoing interface is tunnel. Since the outgoing interface is tunnel, mpls should be enabled on it, so use "mpls ip" on tunnel. int tunnel x tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce mpls ip end HTH, Imran
... View more
Created by
Mohammed Imran Khan
in MPLS
in MPLS
08-13-2013
10:02 PM
08-13-2013
10:02 PM
Hi, I was just trying to undertsand how this will work: tunnelx tunnel destination 2.2.2.2 ip route 2.2.2.2 255.255.255.255 tunnel x You are trying to use the same IP as destination and then using the same IP for routing over the tunnel. In my opinion, this will cause recursive failure and the tunnel will flap. I havent really tested this but thinking with a generic tunnel config point of view!!
... View more
08-04-2013
10:27 PM
Hello Ayush, The command line that I have mentioned is for IOS, can be used under any latest IOS only. For IOS-XR and NX-OS, command line is slightly different. Regards, Imran
... View more
08-02-2013
05:16 AM
Hello Ayush, I am sorry. I really dont have any much idea about the SNMP MIBs. But, just in case, you can see some details here: http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0s/feature/guide/te_mib17.html Regards, Imran
... View more
08-02-2013
04:42 AM
Hello Ayush, You need to configure the LSP in each direction as LSP is unidirectional. I have provided details of only 1 side. Regards, Imran
... View more
08-02-2013
04:26 AM
Hello Ayush, To form the LSP using MPLS Traffic Engineering, folowing is the checklist: ++ CEF should be enabled on all the routers config t ip cef ++ Loopback should be configured on the routers (which will also be used as router-id) ++ End to end loopback reachability should be fine via ISIS or ospf ++ "mpls traffic-eng tunnel" should be configured globally ++ "mpls traffic-eng tunnel" and "ip rsvp bandwidth" should be configured under all the core interfaces. By default rsvp reserves 75% bandwidth ++ mpls traffic-engineering should be configured under the ospf or isis process (as seen in the output of your question) switch(config)# router ospf 200 switch(config-router)# switch(config-router)# mpls traffic-eng area x switch(config-router)# mpls traffic-eng router-id loopback0 ++ Configure the explicit path on 2 end points Suppose you have 3 routers: A---------B---------C so the config on A will be: ip explicit-path name ABC next-address next-address next-address Similarly, configure the explicit path on C in reverse direction. ++ Finally, configure the tunnel on 2 end points. config t int tunnel x ip unnumbered loop0 tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng tunnel destination x.x.x.x >> This is the loopback IP of remote end tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 1 explicit name abc After this, it is upto you if you want to send the traffic on this tunnel via this options: 1. static 2. PBR 3. Autoroute Announce 4. Forwarding Adjacency 5. Load Sharing 6. Automatic Bandwidth Adjustment Seems like the command line you used above is for Nexus (NX-OS). I have explained it for IOS. Hope This Helps!! Regards, Imran
... View more
01-10-2014
Hello Iulian,"wan-mz" means support for WAN modules. In addition, these
are the unique features in s...
01-05-2014
Hello Mohamed,Can you please confirm what you are unable to ping? CE-CE?
Is PE-PE pingable (both vrf...
09-25-2013
Hello Arun,Not sure if I hae understood your prolem correctly. Does the
solution include running "eB...
Created by
Mohammed Imran Khan
in Routing
09-23-2013
09-23-2013
Thanks Sandeep! That was a clear and lucid explanation. It was
helpful!!!/Imran
Created by
Mohammed Imran Khan
in Routing
09-23-2013
09-23-2013
Hello Sandeep Sir,Just wanted to know what is a BGP slow-peer and what
ar/is the way to mitigate thi...
09-17-2013
Hello Juan,Can you please paste the output of following:show ip bgp
vpnv4 all summaryshow ip bgp vpn...
09-17-2013
Hello Juan,was this box running on 153-2.S2 when the issue happened. Are
you still facing the issue ...
08-15-2013
Hello Ayush,sorry for the delay I was on leave. 3. Label are associated
with each interface, hence w...
08-13-2013
Hi,I was just trying to undertsand how this will work:tunnelxtunnel
destination 2.2.2.2ip route 2.2....
08-04-2013
Hello Ayush,The command line that I have mentioned is for IOS, can be
used under any latest IOS only...
08-02-2013
Hello Ayush,I am sorry. I really dont have any much idea about the SNMP
MIBs. But, just in case, you...
08-02-2013
Hello Ayush,You need to configure the LSP in each direction as LSP is
unidirectional. I have provide...
Public Statistics
| Date Registered | 06-16-2011 10:57 AM |
| Date Last Visited | 07-24-2019 02:49 AM |
| Total Messages Posted | 34 |
| Total Helpful Votes Received | 19 |
Helpful Votes Given To
| User | Helpful Count |
|---|---|
| 5 | |
| 5 | |
| 5 | |
| 5 | |
| 5 |
Helpful Votes From
