Deafult route propagation in MPLS

Hi,
(Default Route <------) CE1------PE1---P----PE2---CE2(--->Default Route)
In above, Let CE1 and CE2 have default static route monitored with IP SLA. CE and PE ospf running OSPF. The target is, if IPSLA on CE1 becomes invalid, the static default route shuld disappear from CE1 and it should get default route via CE2 and so on viceversa for IPSLA of CE2 is down...
I tried above scenario on GNS3 it worked but when i tried on real environment, i always needed to clear OSPF process of PE. I have IOS-XR with v3.9.2. If is do not clear OSPF process, i will still see PE pointing default route towards CE ( where static default route is invalid) but in CE, i see default route towards PE .
I guess it is bug of IOS-XR V 3.9.2.
CSCtq86051 BGP vpnv4 prefixes not imported into VRF table under special cases
Can anybody plz suggest?

Could you please share your configurations ?
I'm not sure if you are hitting this bug.

Similar Messages

Injecting Global default Routes into a MPLS VPN

Hi,
I have a PE router running MPBGP which receives two default routes to the internet through an IPV4 BGP session. I need to import these routes in to a VRF and export them to different customer VRFs so that these VRFs are able to access Internet.
I have used the feature called "BGP Support for IP Prefix Import from Global Table into a VRF Table" (URL:http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_guide09186a00803b8db9.html#wp1063870)
and imported these routes into a VRF.
The issue is these routes are not propagated to any of the other PE routers which has customer VRFs configured.
Has anybody tried this or a similar method to inject a dynamic default route into a MPLS VPN.
Any suggestions would be highly appreciated.
Thanks
Subhash

Hi Subhash,
is there anything preventing you from terminating your internet BGP sessions in a VRF? Then everything should go smoothly, i.e. standard VRF import/export.
So possibility A) create a VRF Internet, move bgp neighbor commands there and use filters preventing anything but the default route, then use route targets to distribute the default route into other VRFs.
Possibility B) use static routing with packet leaking. Could look like this:
ip route vrf Internet 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 global
ip route vrf Internet 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 global 250
ip route Serial0/0 !assuming this is where the customer router connects.
Note: the BGP peer IP does not have to be directly connected! There has to be a LDP label for it though. so include your BGP peers network into your IGP and the backup will work, when you loose the link to the peer.
Hope this helps! Please rate all posts.
Regards, Martin

Managing Route-Map based MPLS VPN

1) How to derive the VPN information of the MPLS VPN configured using route-maps? As I understand, stitching route-maps information to derive VPN is complex as it is difficult to derive & correlate the filters tied to each of the route-maps that are tied to a VRF :(
2) Is there any MIB to get from the MIB
a) Route-maps tied to each VRF
b) What is the filter associated with each route-map?
c) Definition of each of the above filter
It would have been nice if the route-maps' name had global-significance within AS, so that we could have treated route-maps, pretty much like the route-tragets. Alas, I doubt it is :(
It should be noted here that if the MPLS VPN is configured using route targets, the VPN information derivation is fairly straight forward throught MplsVpn MIB.
So, the question is what is the simplest way to derive the MPLS VPN info given that they are configured using route-maps in BGP for labelled-route-distribution & for the pkt association with the VRFs.
Thanks,
Suresh R

Each CE in a customer VPN is also added to the management VPN by selecting the Join the management VPN option in the service request user interface.
The function of the management route map is to allow only the routes to the specific CE into the management VPN. The Cisco IOS supports only one export route map and one import route map per VRF.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/netmgtsw/ps4748/products_user_guide_chapter09186a0080353ac3.html

How to implement redundant with 1 CE router to 2 MPLS service providers

Dear all,
Our head-office are currently have 1 Cisco CPE 3825 router with 2 WAN connections to our branches. We are now using static routing protocol in our network infrastructure, we consider how to implement the redundancy for networks by the redundant circuits connection to 2 MPLS providers, only when the primary connection to the primary MPLS L3 provider fail, the backup link to the second MPLS Layer 2 provider automatically active. Anybody knows where can I find information, tips or examples, how we'd handle the routing for that?
We are now have:
1 G0/1 interface connect to primary MPLS L3 Provider (the 2nd G0/2 interface is a leased-line connection to our partner, and we not consider here)
1 HWIC (layer 2) card, with 4 ports, which has interface F0/2/3 connected to the backup MPLS Layer 2 provider.
Thanks in advance.
PS: Current configuration : 3727 bytes
version 12.3
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
service password-encryption
hostname Router
boot-start-marker
boot system flash c3825-entservicesk9-mz.123-11.T7.bin
boot-end-marker
logging buffered 4096 debugging
logging monitor xml
no aaa new-model
ip subnet-zero
ip cef
no ftp-server write-enable
no spanning-tree vlan 4
no spanning-tree vlan 5
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description connect to VDC MPLS$ETH-WAN$
mtu 1480
ip address 222.x.x.66 255.255.255.252
ip flow ingress
ip flow egress
service-policy output SDM-QoS-Policy-1
ip route-cache flow
duplex auto
speed auto
media-type rj45
fair-queue 64 256 256
no cdp enable
interface FastEthernet0/2/0
switchport access vlan 2
no cdp enable
interface FastEthernet0/2/3
description ToTBToverFPT
switchport access vlan 5
no cdp enable
interface Vlan2
description CONNECT TO MPLS_VDC
ip address 192.168.201.9 255.255.248.0
interface Vlan5
description Connect to HoChiMinhCity
ip address 172.16.1.5 255.255.255.252
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 Dialer1
ip route 172.16.244.0 255.255.255.0 222.255.33.65
ip route 192.168.0.0 255.255.248.0 222.255.33.65
ip route 192.168.24.0 255.255.254.0 222.255.33.65
ip route 192.168.30.0 255.255.254.0 222.255.33.65
ip route 192.168.32.0 255.255.254.0 222.255.33.65
ip route 222.x.x.68 255.255.255.252 222.255.33.65
ip route 222.255.33.72 255.255.255.252 222.255.33.65
ip route 222.x.x.196 255.255.255.252 222.255.33.65
ip route 222.x.x.200 255.255.255.252 222.255.33.65
ip http server
ip http authentication local
no ip http secure-server
ip http max-connections 3
control-plane
line con 0
logging synchronous
stopbits 1
line aux 0
stopbits 1
line vty 0 4
password
login
transport input telnet
line vty 5 14
privilege level 15
password
login
transport input telnet
line vty 15
privilege level 15
password
login
transport input telnet
parser view SDM_Monitor
scheduler allocate 20000 1000
end

Hi Mr jianqu,
Because of our customer now has 2 main central offices, and all other sub branches are now connected to each of these main central office via one primary full-meshed MPLS VPN of 1st Service Provider, so If I use the float static routes, and when there is a failure at one link at a CENTRAL CE Router to primary link to primary MPLS VPN Service Provider, but still there is no failure at the other site from a router CE sub branch with the the PE of the primary full-meshed MPLS VPN Layer 3 Service Provider,so It cannot cause a failover to a second redundant link of the 2nd Service Provider?
So with our system, do we only have one solution like this:
-Configure BGP as the routing protocol between the CE and the PE routers.
-Use local preference and Multi Exit Discriminator (MED) when running BGP inside a our customer VPN to select the primary and backup links.
-Use AS-override feature to support overlapping AS numbers between customer sites

Route Leaking in MPLS/VPN Networks (IOX support)

Hi all,
I would like to if IOX of CRS-1 can support route leaking between VRF<>Global routing table?
hhttp://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk436/tk832/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080231a3e.shtmlttp://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk436/tk832/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080231a3e.shtml
Regards

Hi,
You can use the vrf keyword after the prefix you want to join and before specifying the NH. It will tell the router in which VRF the lookup should be done:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/crs/software/crs_r4.0/routing/command/reference/rr40crs1book_chapter9.html#wp172562637
The vrf name "default" is reserved to reference the GRT.
HTH
Laurent.

Routing protocol over mpls

Hi all,
i have to implement a network customer over a vpls provider ( 60 site L2 any to any).
which protocol for this design ? eigrp, ospf or bgp with advantage or inconvenient?
thanks,

If this is to be a layer 2 network for 60 sites with any to any connectivity then you can choose which ever routing protocol you wish since the provider will not be participating in the routing protocol. BGP would be at the bottom of my list for this for several reasons, one of which is that BGP does not do dynamic neighbor discovery and I would not want to manually configure 59 neighbors on each of 60 routers.
Either OSPF or EIGRP could be good choices. If we knew more about this network it might be possible to favor one or the other. For OSPF it seems likely that you would have a single area and some people might be concerned about 60 peers in a single area. But I think it could be appealing that most routers would go through full adjacency with only two peers where with EIGRP each router would negotiate neighbor relationship with 59 neighbors. Another consideration might be what the topology of the sites is like. If each site has several subnets and if the subnets fall into summarizable ranges then EIGRP might be preferred since it enables summarization from each of the routers which reduces the complexity of the routing table on each neighbor.
HTH
Rick

BGP Route Propagation Without Population

Morning/Afternoon all,
I'm in the process of designing a new data centre infrastructure and the technical architect that I'm working with has come up with a wacky idea that involves having an eBGP relationship established with our Internet providers on a router that then passes off the routes to one of it's iBGP peers without letting the routes populate in its routing table. This is largely because the eBGP peering router can't handle the entire Internet routing table as much as the internal router can. This sounds like some kind of jujumagic to me but I wanted to check whether it's possible or not with people that undoubtedly have a great deal more experience than me.
I realize that the easiest thing to do in this scenario would be to have the router that can handle the internet routing table as the eBGP edge gateway to our service providers but I believe that the architect has some exciting ideas that involve DDoS mitigation that mean that we want to do things in the way specified above.
Thanks in advance,
Tom

You can prevent BGP from installing routes into RIB by using "BGP Selective Route Download" feature. This feature is commonly used on Route Reflector deployments, where you dont really need to install the routes on the RIB, only receive them on BGP and pass them to your peers.
More Info:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_bgp/configuration/15-s/irg-15-s-book/irg-selective-download.html
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_bgp/configuration/xe-3s/irg-xe-3s-book/irg-selective-download.pdf

MPLS - How are external/internal routes distinguished?

Hi all
I was setting up an MPLS environment and wanted to get some more information about how MPLS VPN's work. Basically I have three sites connected to the MPLS cloud. Site A runs EIGRP on the customer side and Site B runs OSPF on the customer side. Site C is the one in question. The way I have it designed, Sites A and C have full visability into one another and sites B and C have full visibility into one another. When I configure site C with eigrp, all proper routes are seen, but the OSPF routes from site B are seen as EIGRP external routes. When I switch site C to OSPF, EIGRP routes from site A are seen as OSPF External type 2 routes. I guess my ultimate question is, How does the PE router at site C know the originating protocol? All the routes it receives are from BGP. Does a certain attribute carry this? If so, is this feature specific to Cisco gear or an RFC standard? Thanks in advance for all your help. I can include configs if that would help, below I'll show you my RD and RT's for each VRF and the routing tables of the CE router at Site C before and after the change.
Site A
ip vrf a
rd 1:111
route-target export 1:100
route-target import 1:101
Site B
ip vrf c
rd 3:333
route-target export 3:301
route-target import 1:101
Site C
ip vrf a
rd 1:111
route-target export 1:101
route-target import 1:100
route-target import 3:301
Change from EIGRP to OSPF
Gateway of last resort is not set
     6.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
D       6.6.6.6 [90/435200] via 10.2.1.1, 00:05:26, Ethernet0/0
     7.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C       7.7.7.7 is directly connected, Loopback1
     8.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
D EX    8.8.8.8 [170/2560025856] via 10.2.1.1, 00:02:13, Ethernet0/0
D EX 111.0.0.0/8 [170/2560025856] via 10.2.1.1, 00:02:13, Ethernet0/0
     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
C       10.2.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
D       10.1.1.0/24 [90/307200] via 10.2.1.1, 00:05:56, Ethernet0/0
D       10.20.0.0/16 [90/435200] via 10.2.1.1, 00:05:56, Ethernet0/0
C       10.77.0.0/16 is directly connected, Loopback2
D EX 192.168.1.0/24 [170/2560025856] via 10.2.1.1, 00:02:43, Ethernet0/0
R7(config)#no router eigrp 22
*Mar 1 02:10:20.747: %DUAL-5-NBRCHANGE: IP-EIGRP(0) 22: Neighbor 10.2.1.1 (Ethernet0/0) is
down: interface down
R7(config)#router ospf 3
R7(config-router)#network 10.0.0.0 0.255.255.255 area 0
R7(config-router)#network 7.7.7.7 0.255.255.255 area 0
R7(config-router)#end
R7#show ip route
Codes: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, M - mobile, B - BGP
       D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
       N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
       E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2
       i - IS-IS, su - IS-IS summary, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2
       ia - IS-IS inter area, * - candidate default, U - per-user static route
       o - ODR, P - periodic downloaded static route
Gateway of last resort is not set
     6.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O E2    6.6.6.6 [110/409600] via 10.2.1.1, 00:00:27, Ethernet0/0
     7.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
C       7.7.7.7 is directly connected, Loopback1
     8.0.0.0/32 is subnetted, 1 subnets
O IA    8.8.8.8 [110/21] via 10.2.1.1, 00:00:27, Ethernet0/0
O IA 111.0.0.0/8 [110/21] via 10.2.1.1, 00:00:27, Ethernet0/0
     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 4 subnets, 2 masks
C       10.2.1.0/24 is directly connected, Ethernet0/0
O E2    10.1.1.0/24 [110/1] via 10.2.1.1, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/0
O E2    10.20.0.0/16 [110/409600] via 10.2.1.1, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/0
C       10.77.0.0/16 is directly connected, Loopback2
O IA 192.168.1.0/24 [110/11] via 10.2.1.1, 00:00:26, Ethernet0/0
R7#trace 6.6.6.6
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 6.6.6.6
1 10.2.1.1 652 msec 396 msec 192 msec
2 40.1.1.9 [MPLS: Labels 18/24 Exp 0] 2264 msec 2640 msec 2532 msec
3 30.1.1.3 [MPLS: Labels 18/24 Exp 0] 2320 msec * *
4 10.1.1.1 [MPLS: Label 24 Exp 0] 1816 msec 1792 msec 2148 msec
5 10.1.1.2 1940 msec * 2200 msec
R7#

Hello Edward,
I see nothing strange in the results you have posted. They are completely natural to the process of carrying customer routes over MPLS L3 VPN.
You know yourself that the customer routes are carried between PE routers using BGP, and from PE towards CE, these routes are redistributed from BGP into the particular routing protocol running between PE and CE. Each of these routing protocols automatically marks redistributed networks as external networks. For OSPF, this is a normal part of the open protocol specification - that routes injected into OSPF via redistribution shall be represented as external routes (and carried in LSA-5). Similarly, when you redistribute into EIGRP from a different routing protocol, these routes will be carried by EIGRP as external networks. So what you see here is natural and normal. Even if all sites ran the same routing protocol (EIGRP or OSPF), one site would see networks from other sites as external routes.
In fact, there are extensions to BGP using extended community attributes that try to preserve the original nature of the redistributed routes. The prerequisite is that all sites run the same IGP, either OSPF or EIGRP. In that case, EIGRP routes carried over MPLS can be made look like internal routes although they are redistributed, and OSPF will make the routes appear as inter-area routes, not as external routes. There is even a modification to OSPF allowing you to see other sites as intra-area routes (though this requires configuring so-called OSPF sham links between PEs). All of this is done because an internal network is always preferred to an external network. This causes trouble if there is a backup link directly interconnecting two sites, bypassing the MPLS cloud. As the routing protocol run over this link advertises all networks as internal, this link would always be preferred to the MPLS VPN which is exactly the opposite of what you want to do.
Please feel welcome to ask further!
Best regards,
Peter

MPLS BGP routes push to DMVPN spokes

I have an MPLS with BGP. I also have sites that are not connected directly to the MPLS, but have a s2s VPN to hub sites that are connected to the MPLS and that way they access the MPLS resources. I need to communicate the route changes to the MPLS when the DMVPN fails-over to another hub.
Currently this is my config:
Datacenter (MPLS only)
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description MPLS
ip address 192.168.0.34 255.255.255.252
interface Vlan2
ip address 192.168.96.2 255.255.255.0
router bgp 65511
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 192.168.96.0
neighbor 192.168.0.33 remote-as 65510
Hub site 1 (MPLS + internet)
interface Tunnel200
ip address 10.99.99.1 255.255.255.0
no ip redirects
ip mtu 1400
ip nhrp authentication auth
ip nhrp map multicast dynamic
ip nhrp network-id 12345
ip nhrp holdtime 600
tunnel source GigabitEthernet0/0
tunnel mode gre multipoint
tunnel key 200
tunnel protection ipsec profile dmvpn
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description MPLS
ip address 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0 secondary
ip address 192.168.0.2 255.255.255.252
router bgp 65001
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 192.168.1.0
network 192.168.21.0
!10.99 clients are DMVPN spokes
neighbor 10.99.99.3 remote-as 99010
neighbor 10.99.99.3 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.99.99.21 remote-as 99001
neighbor 10.99.99.21 route-reflector-client
!as 65000 is the MPLS PE
neighbor 192.168.0.1 remote-as 65000
Hub Site 2, has the same configuration, except for local ip address and router BGP ID.
Spoke site:
interface Tunnel200
ip address 10.99.99.3 255.255.255.0
no ip redirects
ip mtu 1400
ip nhrp authentication auth
ip nhrp map 10.99.99.1 PUBLIC_IP_HUB_1
ip nhrp map 10.99.99.16 PUBLIC_IP_HUB_2
ip nhrp network-id 12345
ip nhrp holdtime 600
ip nhrp nhs 10.99.99.1 priority 1
ip nhrp nhs 10.99.99.16 priority 5
ip nhrp nhs fallback 60
tunnel source GigabitEthernet0/0
tunnel mode gre multipoint
tunnel key 200
tunnel protection ipsec profile dmvpn
interface GigabitEthernet0/1
description Internal
ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.192
router bgp 99010
bgp log-neighbor-changes
network 192.168.3.0
neighbor 10.99.99.1 remote-as 65001
neighbor 10.99.99.16 remote-as 65013
On this spoke site
#sh ip route
B 192.168.1.0/24 [20/0] via 10.99.99.1, 00:47:01
which is the HUB network, but the rest of the MPLS routes are not "learned".
What am I missing?
Thanks!

Hi Jon, I've ommited the configuration of the MPLS provider routers in between. The DC is connected to a router that has the AS 65510.
DC:CPE---PE:{MPLS}PE---CPE:HUB---{internet}---Spoke
The DC is ok getting the network information via BGP:
#sh ip route
B 192.168.3.0/24 [20/0] via 192.168.0.33, 3d05h
B 192.168.21.0/24 [20/0] via 192.168.0.33, 3d05h
#sh ip bgp 192.168.21.0
BGP routing table entry for 192.168.21.0/24, version 559
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table default)
Not advertised to any peer
Refresh Epoch 1
65510 3549 6140 3549 65000
192.168.0.33 from 192.168.0.33 (###.###.###.###)
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, best
#sh ip route 192.168.21.0
Routing entry for 192.168.21.0/24
Known via "bgp 65511", distance 20, metric 0
Tag 65510, type external
Last update from 192.168.0.33 3d05h ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 192.168.0.33, from 192.168.0.33, 3d05h ago
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
AS Hops 5
Route tag 65510
MPLS label: none
Spoke:
#sh ip bgp
BGP table version is 494, local router ID is 192.168.21.1
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
r RIB-failure, S Stale, m multipath, b backup-path, f RT-Filter,
x best-external, a additional-path, c RIB-compressed,
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
RPKI validation codes: V valid, I invalid, N Not found
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 10.0.129.32/27 10.99.99.16 0 65013 65012 3549 ?
*> 192.168.96.0 10.99.99.16 0 65013 65012 3549 6745 65510 ?
#sh ip route 192.168.96.0
Routing entry for 192.168.96.0/24
Known via "bgp 99001", distance 20, metric 0
Tag 65013, type external
Last update from 10.99.99.16 00:02:11 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 10.99.99.16, from 10.99.99.16, 00:02:11 ago
Route metric is 0, traffic share count is 1
AS Hops 5
Route tag 65013
MPLS label: none
#sh ip bgp 192.168.96.0
BGP routing table entry for 192.168.96.0/24, version 465
Paths: (1 available, best #1, table default)
Not advertised to any peer
Refresh Epoch 2
65013 65012 3549 6745 65510
10.99.99.16 from 10.99.99.16 (10.2.16.1)
Origin incomplete, localpref 100, valid, external, best
The route is not being updated to the rest of the routers, and the 192.168.21.0 network is still announced via the old route.
(from spoke)
ping 192.168.96.2
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.168.96.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
From DC
#traceroute 192.168.21.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 192.168.21.1
VRF info: (vrf in name/id, vrf out name/id)
1 192.168.0.33 [AS 65510] 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
2 172.50.1.33 [AS 65510] 56 msec 36 msec 36 msec
3 10.80.1.1 [AS 3549] 44 msec 44 msec 44 msec
4 10.80.1.2 [AS 3549] 172 msec 172 msec 168 msec
5 172.50.1.1 [AS 3549] 168 msec 168 msec 172 msec
6 172.50.1.2 [AS 3549] 180 msec 180 msec 176 msec
7 192.168.0.2 [AS 65000] 172 msec 172 msec 168 msec <- old route, should be 192.168.0.9
8 192.168.0.2 [AS 65000] !H * !H

7600 as Backbone router for MPLS core

I have 7600's and 7500's in my backbone and 7200's on the edge. My question is that when I look at the feature navigator the 7600 with Sup 720 is missing a lot of basic features required to be a core router of an MPLS Backbone. Features like Traffic engineering fast reroute, MPLS enabled Netflow are missing on this platform, is this platform not a good candidate to be a Backbone router for a service provider offering MPLS services??? 7500 on the other hand it seems 7500 seems to have support for the MPLS related features.

Not sure what version you where looking at but...
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) s72033_rp Software (s72033_rp-ADVIPSERVICESK9_WAN-M), Version 12.2(18)SXF, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
Technical Support: http://www.cisco.com/techsupport
Copyright (c) 1986-2005 by cisco Systems, Inc.
Compiled Sat 10-Sep-05 01:18 by ccai
Image text-base: 0x40101040, data-base: 0x42D60000
ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 12.2(17r)S2, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
BOOTLDR: s72033_rp Software (s72033_rp-ADVIPSERVICESK9_WAN-M), Version 12.2(18)SXF, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
CASAN_Core1 uptime is 1 week, 4 hours, 9 minutes
Time since CASAN_Core1 switched to active is 1 week, 4 hours, 8 minutes
System returned to ROM by power cycle (SP by power on)
System image file is "disk0:s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-18.SXF.bin"
This product contains cryptographic features and is subject to United
States and local country laws governing import, export, transfer and
use. Delivery of Cisco cryptographic products does not imply
third-party authority to import, export, distribute or use encryption.
Importers, exporters, distributors and users are responsible for
compliance with U.S. and local country laws. By using this product you
agree to comply with applicable laws and regulations. If you are unable
to comply with U.S. and local laws, return this product immediately.
A summary of U.S. laws governing Cisco cryptographic products may be found at:
http://www.cisco.com/wwl/export/crypto/tool/stqrg.html
If you require further assistance please contact us by sending email to
[email protected].
cisco CISCO7609 (R7000) processor (revision 1.1) with 983008K/65536K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID FOX092307Q5
SR71000 CPU at 600Mhz, Implementation 0x504, Rev 1.2, 512KB L2 Cache
Last reset from power-on
SuperLAT software (copyright 1990 by Meridian Technology Corp).
X.25 software, Version 3.0.0.
Bridging software.
TN3270 Emulation software.
1 SIP-200 controller .
1 Virtual Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interface
74 Gigabit Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interfaces
1917K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
8192K bytes of packet buffer memory.
65536K bytes of Flash internal SIMM (Sector size 512K).
Configuration register is 0x2102
CASAN_Core1#
CASAN_Core1(config)#mpls traffic-eng ?
auto-bw auto-bw parameters
fast-reroute fast-reroute parameters
link-management Link Management configuration
logging Trap logging configuration
path-selection Path Selection Configuration
reoptimize Reoptimization parameters
signalling Traffic Engineering Signalling Parameters
topology Topology Database Configuration
tunnels Traffic Engineering tunnels

Routing to MPLS network

Hi,
We have several branch offices connected via a managed MPLS network. Each MPLS router in the branch office is connected to the local LAN switch, with its separate firewall and internet access router. How do we direct traffic from the local network (unmanaged) to the private IP addresses in the MPLS network (managed)? Can static routes be configured on the ASA5505 firewall to route traffic to MPLS router?
ISP router>local router>ASA5505 firewall>LAN switch>MPLS router>MPLS cloud.

Said
Is the LAN switch layer 2 only or layer 3 capable. If you do not have access to the MPLS router you have 2 options
1) Add a route on the ASA for the private MPLS networks pointing to the MPLS router. You will need to enable hairpinning on the ASA.
Set the default-gateway of the clients on your LAN switch to be the ASA.
2) If your switch is a Layer 3 switch then you can do this in a much cleaner way. Create the L3 vlan interface(s) for the client vlan(s) on the switch and then you can use statics on the L3 switch eg.
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 "ASA inside interface"
ip route "MPLS private net" "subnet mask" "MPLS router inside interface"
Jon

MPLS vs ROUTING

Guys first of all i am vvv new to this (MPLS) now guys i have read some few articles......plus some few chapters of few books on MPLS......the main theme of MPLS i sthat it is a lable technology send...froward packets on labels rather then plooking the ip address (tradional)........now guys what is th eplus point then.........i mean the only thing which i can see is that routers would not hold routing tables......so whats th emain theme of MPLS.......i mean i didnt get any main different....please help me clearing my concept....thanks alot for looking

The routers would still hold the IGP routing table. MPLS isn't a routing protocol. There used to be some performance gains because the router did a lookup on the label (32 bits). However that really isn't the case anymore with lookups being done in hardware. If you're running BGP across your network, with MPLS implemented you can remove BGP from you core devices and just have it on the edge devices. The biggest thing with MPLS though is the other services you can offer on the network once MPLS is deployed. You can offer Layer 3 VPNs, Layer 2 VPNs (EoMPLS, VPLS..) and MPLS Traffic Engineering.

MPLS support for 2621XM Router

Hi ,
Can anyone suggest me the IOS for 2621XM Router to support the MPLS LDP.
My router is a Provider edge router.
My flash is only 32 MB .
Thanx in advance
yogesh

Hi
You should use : C2600-spservicesk9-mz
This IOS is SP Services IOS for 2600 & 2600XM series router which support MPLS .
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/iosswrel/ps8802/ps5460/prod_bulletin09186a00801af451.html
Regards
Chetan Kumar
http://chetanress.blogspot.com

When Primary link restore back route still learn via CE_HQ instead MPLS

Hi Sir,
Please refer my issue as below and attachment for log captured;
1) When primary link down at CE_Branch_1, it will triggered the ISDN to CE_HQ to communicate.
2) When the primary is up again at CE_Branch_1, the ISDN will be disconnected.
3) At CE_HQ, when show ip route the 10.106.15.0 network still appear in static route instead of OSPF route. Hence, LAN user at CE_Branch_1 will not able to access HQ anymore.
4) When sho ip route vrf COURTS at PEWBRF1, you can notice network 10.106.15.0 is still learned via 202.178.128.70 and not 178.28.0.20.
5) Have tried to manipulate the route-map with set local-preference = 50 and set weight = 0 for network 10.106.15.0 that being redistributed from OSPF into MPBGP at PEWBRF1 still doesnt help. Furthermore, I encounter the route have become RIB-Failure when show ip bgp vpnv4 vrf COURTS.
6) At CE_HQ, there is floating static route being configured to point to CE_Branch_1s LAN, ip route 10.106.15.0 255.255.255.0 128.1.1.15.
7) When show ip bgp vpnv4 vrf COURTS 10.106.15.0 and show ip route vrf COURTS 10.106.15.0 at PEWBRF1 the route 10.106.15.0 still prefer to come from CE_HQ. This is the problem, now the CE_HQ can not reach CE_Branch_1.
Please advise.

Folks, this is typical working when using OSPF. Using OSPF the down bit is set on LSA (not all of them but I dont need to go down that far). Because the router is redistributing the static routes into OSPF the PE router shall receive the routes via the mpls cloud from that redist point. It will then get them back from the original PE-CE but these will never come in. You have GOT to configure sham-links between any area (PE)s that have a backdoor between them. If the ISDN line is using OSPF then what happens is that the routes across the ISDN line appear as "O" routes and the routes from the PE-CE conenction appear as "IA" routes. Hence the ISDN line is the preferred path. Read up on sham-links as they go into the real detail of why this happens. Once you get used to what is happening it all rather makes sense. :-)

Centralize internet access in MPLS VPN

Can i implement Centralize internet access (the Hub CE Router to performs NAT) in cisco MPLS VPN solution?
If so, is there any example about that? i can't find it at CCO~
Thanks a lot~

If you run dynamic routing protocol in PE-CE,like rip2,ospf,bgp,do the following task.
1:set a default route in HUB CE;and generate the default route under its dynamic protocol.
2:in other CEs, make sure they can learn this route.
If you run static route and vrf static route between CE and PE,do the following task.
1.set default route in HUB CE, and set default route in other CEs.
2.In all PEs,redistribute the connected and static rotues to address-family ipv4 of customer vrf.
3.set the customer vrf default route in all PE which connected your all CEs.
Note: make sure all PEs can reach the GW address of vrf deafult route. GW IP address is the interface of which HUB CE towards PE.
command: "ip route vrf 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 global.
TRY

Deafult route propagation in MPLS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for