05-07-2014 04:34 AM
Hello all,
After upgrading 4.2.3 to 4.3.4, when checking the failing config, I found the following issue regarding VRRP:
According to bug CSCed75140, I expect this issue to be solved starting in 4.3.0...
Any idea?
Thx,
Pedro
Solved! Go to Solution.
05-09-2014 04:15 AM
Pedro,
There must be a missunderstand the bug you quote is to improve the error notification with this unsupported config, it doesn't make the config supported. Some details on this issue from the Release notes of the bug:
<B>Problem Symptom:</B> In a router running IOS-XR, configuring the same virtual router id(VRID) on multiple sub-interfaces of the same physical interfaces is <B>NOT</B> supported for HSRP/ VRRP <B>Workaround:</B> Use different virtual router id for the different sub-interfaces of same physical interface <B>Further Problem Description:</B> Example of unsupported config: <B> router vrrp interface GigabitEthernet0/5/0/38.175 vrrp 1 ipv4 10.186.0.1 ! interface GigabitEthernet0/5/0/38.176 vrrp 1 ipv4 10.186.0.9 ! ! </B> If you have two groups configured with the same virtual router id, this means that they have the same virtual MAC address (as this is derived from the virtual router ID). When VRRP is in Master state, it installs an entry for it's virtual MAC in to the MAC filter for the interface over which it is running. However, it is not possible to program the MAC filter per sub-interface. Therefore if VRRP is running over a sub-interface it is the MAC filter of the underlying physical interface which is actually programmed (although VRRP has no way of being aware of this). If using the unsupported configuration, you have two Master groups with the same virtual MAC address on sub-interfaces of the same physical interface. In this case there will only be one MAC address installed in the filter of the physical interface. When one of these groups is removed by configuration or it transitions out of Master state, it removes its virtual MAC address from the MAC filter of the underlying physical interface meaning there is now no MAC address installed at all and the VRRP feature for the remaining Master group will no longer work. The root cause of the problem is that the MAC filter cannot be programmed per sub-interface.
05-08-2014 09:03 AM
Works for me? There is a VRRP bug, make sure that SMU or Service Pack2 for 4.3.4 is installed.
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9K-PE1-R0#sh run interface TenGigE0/0/0/0.3701
Thu May 8 00:39:44.352 UTC
interface TenGigE0/0/0/0.3701
ipv4 address 200.100.1.1 255.255.255.0
encapsulation dot1q 10
!
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9K-PE1-R0#sh inst ac sum
Thu May 8 00:39:46.994 UTC
Default Profile:
SDRs:
Owner
Active Packages:
disk0:asr9k-mini-px-4.3.4
disk0:asr9k-mgbl-px-4.3.4
disk0:asr9k-mcast-px-4.3.4
disk0:asr9k-fpd-px-4.3.4
disk0:asr9k-mpls-px-4.3.4
disk0:asr9k-px-4.3.4.sp2
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9K-PE1-R0#
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9K-PE1-R0#sh run router vrrp
Thu May 8 00:39:59.791 UTC
router vrrp
interface TenGigE0/0/0/0.3701
address-family ipv4
vrrp 1
priority 200
timer 1
address 200.100.1.100
!
!
!
!
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9K-PE1-R0#
05-09-2014 04:09 AM
Hi Eddie,
Sorry but I was not clear in my first post.
The idea is to have the same VRRP ID in different sub-interfaces in the same physical interface. According to CSCed75140 this should be supported starting in 4.3.0. However after upgrading to 4.3.4 the router returns the "Semantic Errors" I posted previously. The idea is to have the following config:
router vrrp
interface TenGigE0/0/0/0.3700
address-family ipv4
vrrp 1
priority 200
timer 1
address 200.100.1.100
interface TenGigE0/0/0/0.3701
address-family ipv4
vrrp 1
priority 200
timer 1
address 200.100.1.100
Is this a supported config in 4.3.4?
Thanks.
Regards,
Pedro
05-09-2014 04:15 AM
Pedro,
There must be a missunderstand the bug you quote is to improve the error notification with this unsupported config, it doesn't make the config supported. Some details on this issue from the Release notes of the bug:
<B>Problem Symptom:</B> In a router running IOS-XR, configuring the same virtual router id(VRID) on multiple sub-interfaces of the same physical interfaces is <B>NOT</B> supported for HSRP/ VRRP <B>Workaround:</B> Use different virtual router id for the different sub-interfaces of same physical interface <B>Further Problem Description:</B> Example of unsupported config: <B> router vrrp interface GigabitEthernet0/5/0/38.175 vrrp 1 ipv4 10.186.0.1 ! interface GigabitEthernet0/5/0/38.176 vrrp 1 ipv4 10.186.0.9 ! ! </B> If you have two groups configured with the same virtual router id, this means that they have the same virtual MAC address (as this is derived from the virtual router ID). When VRRP is in Master state, it installs an entry for it's virtual MAC in to the MAC filter for the interface over which it is running. However, it is not possible to program the MAC filter per sub-interface. Therefore if VRRP is running over a sub-interface it is the MAC filter of the underlying physical interface which is actually programmed (although VRRP has no way of being aware of this). If using the unsupported configuration, you have two Master groups with the same virtual MAC address on sub-interfaces of the same physical interface. In this case there will only be one MAC address installed in the filter of the physical interface. When one of these groups is removed by configuration or it transitions out of Master state, it removes its virtual MAC address from the MAC filter of the underlying physical interface meaning there is now no MAC address installed at all and the VRRP feature for the remaining Master group will no longer work. The root cause of the problem is that the MAC filter cannot be programmed per sub-interface.
05-09-2014 04:20 AM
OK! So this is not a supported config? The information I got from TAC (back in 2012) is that this feature would be introduced in 4.3.0 (via CSCed75140 enhancement).
Thanks!
05-09-2014 04:22 AM
Yea sorry about that, it's not supported, the TAC engineer must have miss understood the changes. You need to keep your VRRP group unique on the same physical interface.
Shouldn't be too much of a problem..
Regards
Eddie.
05-09-2014 04:35 AM
Thx for the clarification Eddie!
The only problem we have is that the client will soon run out of VRRP IDs in the box, and they was expecting this feature to be introduced in 4.3.4 (it was one of the drivers to upgrade).
Any idea if this feature will be available in a near future?
Thanks!
05-09-2014 05:23 AM
Perdo,
Thats all that is supported in this generation of LCs. Maybe they should consider during BVI and secondary addresses?
Regards
Eddie.
05-09-2014 06:41 AM
I'll check that.
Thanks for all your help Eddie!
Regards
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