CISCO ASR901 BRIDGE BETWEEN 2 INTERFACES WITH XCONNECT

Question

Hi All!
  I'm looking for some way to make a transparent bridge between two interfaces of a Cisco router ASR901 , is there any possibility? I ask this because I have a scenario where I would use the ASR901 to the following question :
POP01 (                            )  ASR901  g0 / 6 -------- > ISG_7206
POP02 ( MPLS CLOUD )                   g0 / 7 -------- > ISG_7206
POP03 (                            )
The ASR901 will focus EoMPLS with other points in the network and pass on to ISG routers , ie , VLANs would have to be two ports with XConnect to a remote router , the configuration would be something like this :
interface GigabitEthernet0/6
Core description : MPLS CONC PPPOE02
no ip address
negotiation auto
hold- queue 1024 in
hold- queue 1024 in October
service instance 4095 ethernet
  encapsulation dot1q 4094
  rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
interface GigabitEthernet0/7
Core description : 7206_PPPOE_01
no ip address
negotiation auto
service instance 4095 ethernet
  encapsulation dot1q 4094
  rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric
end
L2VPN XConnect context TEST
ethernet interworking
member 201.55.127.202 1212 encapsulation mpls group TEST
member GigabitEthernet0 / 7 service -instance TEST 4095 group priority 1
member GigabitEthernet0 / 6 service -instance 4095
redundancy group delay 1 3 TEST
But without an interface that was redundant of other , what I need is the 2 interfaces in " bridge " making a XConnect to a remote router , and these 2 interfaces connected ISGs in 2 to make a balance .

Answer 1

Hello,
I do not believe that the ASR901 will do this without help from an upstream device. If I understand correctly, you want to build a bridge-domain with 3 EFPs: 2 physical ports, and one pseudowire. As of the last IOS revision that I have configured on this platform, the 901 doesn't support the pseudowire on a bridge-domain, only a service instance.
It seems to me that you would need an upstream box involved to support this.
Either:
Build 2 pseudowires to an upstream box that supports this configuration (like an ME 3600x, ME3800x, or 9k).
or
Associate both service instances to a common bridge domain that is extended to an upstream box that is initiating the pseudowire. More platforms would support this, since it does not require supporting the pseudowire on a bridge domain.
...Unless you are looking to build an LACP channel-group on the interfaces connected to the ISGs to load-balance. The 901 supports LACP, and it also supports building an EFP (service instance) on the channel-group interface. This technically makes the 2 physical interfaces one EFP. The part of this that I have not tried is building a pseudowire on an EFP on a channel-group.
Hope this helps.
Jason