Traffic-eng

tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option number {dynamic |Explicit)
what is explicit if we define next hop under explicit path it will take that route only .Kindly eplain

hello
explicit you specify the path it should take(if constraints are met)
dynamic you rely on cspf to find a path given the constraints
etienne

Similar Messages

What is it "tunnel mpls traffic-eng bandwidth" !!!

Buenas dia, Amigos!
I want to limit the speed of the MPLS Tunnel between two sites. I'm going to create a MPLS tunnel and apply
"tunnel mpls traffic-eng bandwidth X"
Can anybody answer me, it can really limit the speed or only reserve bandwidth?
!Hasta la vista, Amigos!

Hello Oleg,
the command is only used during the tunnel setup and has administrative meaning. It is used by RSVP for reservation of resources. It does not provide any form of rate control over the tunnel.
You need to control how much traffic you put on the tunnel on the tail end router.
Hope to help
Giuseppe

Which object in RSVP message carried the value configured by "tunnel mpls traffic-eng bandwidth" command?

Hi Experts,
I configured a simple MPLS TE tunnel in my routers and configured it with "tunnel mpls traffic-eng bandwidth 777" command. The tunnel came up fine. I tried to capture the packets (using GNS capture) going out of tunnel head end interface but I could not find out on which message object the value '777' is carried. Can anyone please explain me exactly in which RSVP/OSPF message the bandwidth value is carried?
Thanks,
Madhu

Hello Madhu,
I think it is FLOWSPEC object, not 100% sure
The FLOWSPEC class is defined in RFC 2210. Cisco IOS Software requests Controlled-Load service when reserving a TE tunnel. The FLOWSPEC format is complex and has many things in it that RSVP for MPLS TE doesn't use.The FLOWSPEC is used in Resv messages—Resv, ResvTear, ResvErr, ResvConf, ResvTearConf. Its only use in MPLS TE is to use the average rate section of the FLOWSPEC to specify the bandwidth desired, in bytes. Not bits. Bytes. So if you configure a tunnel with tunnel mpls traffic-eng 100000 to request 100 Mbps of bandwidth, this gets signalled as 12,500,000 bytes per second (100 Mb is 100,000 Kb is 100,000,000 bits, which is 12,500,000 bytes).
Hope this helps
Regards
Mahesh

MVPN RPF: traffic-eng multicast-intact + forwarding-adjacency rpf failure

Hello all,
Am going through a bit of pain at the moment trying to get around TE tunnels breaking RPF checks for multicast.
The common wisdom seems to be to use the "mpls traffic-eng multicast-intact" command, however this only seems to work for TE auto-route.
Is it reasonable to expect that this should work for forwarding-adjacency also?
The documentation says that by using the multicast-intact command, that it will not consider TE tunnels in the RPF check. It seems to me that this should work for forwarding-adjacency as well as auto-route.
This is on 7600s running RSP720s (SRB).
Any hints?
I can provide more details on the design if necessary.
Regards,
Anton

Yes, our tunnel will be dynamic also.
It is a ring based off our main core. I'm going to try a bit of ascii art..
http://www.huge.geek.nz/ascii.txt
We are using TE tunnels with FA from R2/R3 back to C3/C4 to control traffic on our ring (we have congestion so we need to spread the traffic around using TE).
At the moment, we also have multicast flooding in both directions around the ring. Each of the ring PEs needs to receive the multicast.
Our TE tunnels have a deliberate lower metric than the ring so that they will draw all traffic to/from the core to/from the ring PEs. They are also running ldp over rsvp.
This breaks multicast because it arrives on a physical interface but has a route back through the TE tunnels.
If we add a static mroute pointing in the usual arrival direction of the multicast then it will fix the problem, until that leg of the ring breaks. If we point the static at a recursive target then it will most likely choose the tunnel and we have the same RPF problem again. Hope this explains it.. otherwise I can provide more detail.
Regards,
Anton

"mpls traffic eng passive-interface" mapping on XR

Dears,
ON IOS for TE-InterAS ,the command "mpls traffic-eng passive-interface" is used on InterAS link which isn't running IGP so i am seeking for the equivlent command on XR but i can't find it so please advise what is the equivlent command on XR
Thanks

Hello Amr,
There is no equivalent command on IOS-XR. Are you trying to set up Inter-AS MPLS TE on XR? In IOS-XR, inter-AS tunnels are supported only by using verbatim path-options. Verbatim path-options are supported on both IOS and IOS-XR.
HTH,
Rivalino

Tunnel mpls traffic-eng dynamic reoptimization issue

we have a dynamic tunnel, when the LSP switches to a suboptimal path due to failure on the optimal path it does not switch back to the optimal path once the path is restored.
How do we enable automatic reoptimization plus a threshold setting re = 5 seconds
interface Tunnel0
description test
ip unnumbered Loopback0
tunnel destination 211.1.219.6
tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce
tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 10 dynamic

If you do a "show mpls traffic-eng tunnels brief" you will see that the default periodic optimization is set to 1 hour (3600 seconds).
You can use the following command to change this default timer:
mpls traffic-eng reoptimize timers frequency
For more information on this command, please see this URL:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios123/123cgcr/swtch_r/swi_m3.htm#wp1061558
Hope this helps,

Policy based routing on VRF interfaces to route traffic through TE Tunnel

Hi All,
Is there a method to do policy based routing on VRF interfaces and route data traffic through one TE tunnel and non-data traffic through another TE tunnel.
The tunnel is already build up with these below config
interface Tunnel25
ip unnumbered Loopback0
tunnel destination 10.250.16.250
tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 10 explicit name test
ip explicit-path name test enable
next-address x.x.x.x
next-address y.y.y.y
router ospf 1
mpls traffic-eng router-id Loopback0
mpls traffic-eng area 0
mpls traffic-eng tunnels
nterface GigabitEthernet5/2
mpls traffic-eng tunnels
mpls ip
Is there additional config needed to work ,also in the destination end for the return traffic,we want to use the normal PATH --I mean non TE tunnel.
We tested with the above scenario,but couldn't able to reach the destination.Meantime we had a question,when the packet uses the policy map while ingress,it may not know the associatuion with VRF(Is that right? --If so ,how to make it happen)
Any help would be really appreciated
Thanks
Regards
Anantha Subramanian Natarajan

hi Anantha!
I might not be the right person to comment on your first question. I have not configured MVPNs yet and not very confertable with the topic.
But I am sure that if you read through the CBTS doc thoroughly, you might be able to derive the answer yourself. One thing I notice is that " a Tunnel will be selected regularly according to the routing process (even isf it is cbts enabled). From the tunnels selected using the regular best path selection, the traffic is mapped to a perticular tunnel in the group if specific class is mapped to that tunnel.
So a master tunnel can be the only tunnel between the 2 devices over which the routing (bgp next hops) are exchanged and all other tunnels can be members of this tunnel. So your RPF might not fail.
You might have to explore on this a bit more and read about the co-existance of multicast and TE. This will be the same as that.
For your second question, the answer would be easy :
If you want a specific eompls cust to take a particular tunnel/path, just create a seperate pair of loopbacks on the PEs. Make the loopback learnt on the remote PE through the tunnel/path that you want the eompls to take. Then establish the xconnect with this loopback. I am assuming that your question is that a particular eompls session should take a particular path.
If you meant that certain traffic from the same eompls session take a different path/tunnel, then CBTS will work.
Regards,
Niranjan

How traffic is directed in MPLS network? Via ldp LSPs or via RSVP LSPs

My question is basicly to understand how traffic is treated.
Lets assume our topology is :
A-----------------------------B------------------------------------C--------------------------------------------D
1-) if we just enable MPLS under all interfaces, LDP labels are exchanged with each peer. At that moment   RIB, LIB, FIB and LFIB are created on all routers. So LDP LSPs are created dynamicly. but If i ping "loopback D" from router A, there will be IP routing or LABEL switching. will routing make routing by looking IP address at each hop or labels will be swapped at each hop ?
2-) If we enable MPLS traffic engineering capability and create a tunnel interface between router A and router D, vice versa. At that moment, Router A will have :
-simple IGP reachability to Router D,
-Dynamic LDP LSP and
-RSVP tunnel.
what about now, Which one of the paths above my traffic will follow ? do I have to direct my traffic to tunnel interface signaled via RSVP. Is there any precedence for choosing the path that traffic will be addressed ?

for second secenario, i have found that I have to write
"tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce " other wise traffic will always follow LDP signaled paths. In order to get all traffic inside "tunnel" we should execute that command. once you write that command you see that ;
Before executing command;
R1#sh ip route
O       3.3.3.3 [110/129] via 3.3.3.3, 00:07:08, serial0/0
R1#show mpls forwarding-table
18     18          3.3.3.3/32        0          Se0/0      point2point
After executing command;
R1#sh ip route
O       3.3.3.3 [110/129] via 3.3.3.3, 00:07:08, Tunnel0
R1#show mpls forwarding-table
18     Pop tag [T] 3.3.3.3/32        0          Tu0        point2point
Hope you see my point, router doesnt decide to use RSVP signaled LSP itself, we shoud trig router to use RSVP signalled LSP.

Direct traffic onto an LSP based on packets ToS value

Hello...
I am trying to push traffic onto an LSP thats mutiple paths created as below.
interface Tunnel3080
ip unnumbered Loopback0
tunnel destination 10.253.253.136
tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 11 explicit name CTel-C32-CGx-CSnf-Cwil
tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 12 explicit name CTel-CGlb-C1275-CMar-CWil
tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option protect 11 explicit name CTel-CGlb-C1275-CMar-CWil
ip explicit-path name CTel-CGlb-C1275-CMar-CWil enable
next-address 10.254.0.241
next-address 10.254.0.242
next-address 10.254.0.2
next-address 10.254.1.82
next-address 10.254.13.1
ip explicit-path name CTel-C32-CGx-CSnf-Cwil enable
next-address 10.254.0.242
next-address 10.254.0.241
next-address 10.254.0.2
next-address 10.254.1.82
next-address 10.254.13.1
Traffic is coming in from an interface vlan 503; and is going to lets say 10.11.1.2.
I've an ACL as below to catch the traffic into an ACL.
ip access-list extended TOS9TrafficTo10-11-1
   10 permit ip 10.32.21.2 10.11.1.2 tos 9
I tried with below to direct the traffic onto an above tunnel LSP.
route-map BO_LA permit 10
match ip address TOS9TrafficTo10-11-1
set interface Tunnel3080
and then applied the map to the interface as below...
interface vlan 503
ip policy route-map BO_LA
Its not working..   and need some assistance.. I know route maps are not the solution here as they're used for routes and not the actual traffic, I believe. Is there any other solution.
-Tarkesh

Tarkesh,
This should actually work because a route-map can also be used for policy-based routing and not just for routing information manipulation. I am in fact surprised that your configuration has no effect. The first thing coming to my mind here: is the interface Vlan503 the incoming interface for this traffic you want to send via specific MPLS TE tunnels? Is the traffic actually routed, i.e. passing through the Vlan503, or is it simply switched within VLAN 503?
Also, how do you know your configuration has no effect?
There is an option of class-based tunnel selection for ingress traffic, however, that feature is supported only on selected platforms. You can read (much) more here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_te_tun_select.html

Traffic selection

I created one LSP on the headend routeur.
I want to reduce the part of trafic in this LSP. So, I want to do a traffic selection on my headend router based on the source address and source port.
I can't find the mean to do this traffic selection.
The only mean I found is to do class-based tunnel selection with the following command :
tunnel mpls traffic-eng exp 5
How can I do to do my trafic selection according to address pool and/or port field?

To sum it,
1) For ATOM you can use Atom Tunnel selection feature to select the right tunnel for your ATOM treating it like a virtual leased circuit.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6922/products_feature_guide09186a008067cf79.html.
2) For all the traffic going to a certain destination from a PE you can use "Class Based Tunnel Selection"
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1829/products_feature_guide09186a00802659b9.html
3) For all traffic from a certain VRF and going to a destination PE you can use the RT manipulation with a Tunnel selection with static route.
4) options 1, 2 and 3 are destination based for source based you have only option of the EXP values, like you can map your actual source address/port to a certain EXP and then map that EXP onto an LSP using the "Class Based Tunnel Selection" But you have only 8 classifications available for the whole PE.
5) This option gives you the flexibility to assign a VRF to incoming traffic based on source IP address "VRF selection using PBR"
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6922/products_feature_guide09186a0080856a80.html
You can choose what you feel is appropriate from the above as you know the objective.
HTH-Cheers,
Swaroop

Autoroute Announce is dropping traffic

I'm running 15.3(3)S on a group of three ME3600X switches and I'm having some issues testing autoroute announce. I've built a tunnel from one of my ME3600X switches to a remote router and the tunnel is up and accepts traffic from the local switch:
P2P TUNNELS/LSPs:
TUNNEL NAME                     DESTINATION     UP IF     DOWN IF   STATE/PROT
me3600-4.lab_to_cr3_lab         10.10.8.3     -         Vl100     up/up
ME3600X-4.lab#ping 10.10.8.3
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.10.8.3, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/1/4 ms
ME3600X-4.lab#sh int tun1 | inc pack
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
     0 packets input, 0 bytes, 0 no buffer
     5 packets output, 520 bytes, 0 underruns
However, as soon as I add 'tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce' to the tunnel configuration, IP traffic to destinations that are preferred through the tunnel drop from anywhere behind this ME3600:
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip route 10.10.8.11
Routing entry for 10.10.8.11/32
Known via "isis", distance 115, metric 600, type level-2
Redistributing via isis lab-test
Last update from 10.10.8.3 on Tunnel1, 00:10:06 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 172.16.24.149, from 10.10.8.11, 00:10:06 ago, via Vlan100
     Route metric is 600, traffic share count is 1
   10.10.8.3, from 10.10.8.11, 00:10:06 ago, via Tunnel1
     Route metric is 600, traffic share count is 1
Here's a ping from a switch behind the ingress ME3600:
ME3600X-1.lab#ping 10.10.8.11
Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.10.8.11, timeout is 2 seconds:
Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
Traffic is not making it into the tunnel at all, according to the tunnel stats, unless I ping from the ingress ME3600 switch:
ME3600X-4.lab#sh int tun1 | inc pack
5 minute input rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
5 minute output rate 0 bits/sec, 0 packets/sec
     0 packets input, 0 bytes, 0 no buffer
     0 packets output, 0 bytes, 0 underruns
Traceroutes show the traffic dying at the ingress switch and packet captures on the upstream link from the ingress switch show no packets, plain IP or otherwise, exiting its upstream interface:
ME3600X-1.lab#traceroute 10.10.8.11
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.10.8.11
VRF info: (vrf in name/id, vrf out name/id)
1 172.16.32.1 [MPLS: Label 27 Exp 0] 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
2 * * *
3
I'm just wondering what it is I'm doing wrong, it has to be something simple. A cluebat upside the head would be much appreciated. Here's the relevant config of the ingress switch:
ME3600X-4.lab#sh run int vl100
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 223 bytes
interface Vlan100
mtu 9000
ip address 172.16.24.150 255.255.255.252
ip mtu 1500
ip router isis lab-test
mpls ip
mpls traffic-eng tunnels
isis circuit-type level-2-only
isis metric 100
isis hello-interval 3
end
ME3600X-4.lab#sh run int vl4000
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 279 bytes
interface Vlan4000
mtu 9000
ip address 172.16.32.1 255.255.255.0
ip mtu 1500
ip router isis lab-test
mpls ip
mpls mtu 1546
mpls traffic-eng tunnels
isis metric 200
isis hello-interval 3
end
ME3600X-4.lab#sh run int tun1
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 242 bytes
interface Tunnel1
description me3600-4.lab_to_cr3_lab
ip unnumbered Loopback1
tunnel mode mpls traffic-eng
tunnel destination 10.10.8.3
tunnel mpls traffic-eng autoroute announce
tunnel mpls traffic-eng path-option 1 dynamic
end
ME3600X-4.lab#sh run partition router isis lab-test
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 343 bytes
Configuration of Partition - router isis lab-test
router isis lab-test
net 47.0000.0101.8820.8024.00
is-type level-2-only
metric-style wide
passive-interface Loopback1
mpls traffic-eng router-id Loopback1
mpls traffic-eng level-1
mpls traffic-eng level-2
end

Looks like the switch 24 is not able to either impose a tag or swap the tag and send out to next hop.
That's what I thought, too, as the traffic is not even leaving the 24 switch, according to packet captures taken between the 24 switch and the 12 router.
1. "show ip route 10.10.8.3" from switch 21 and 24 before and after the command addition.
Switch 21 before the command addition:
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip route 10.10.8.3
Routing entry for 10.10.8.3/32
Known via "isis", distance 115, metric 700, type level-2
Redistributing via isis
Last update from 172.16.32.1 on Vlan4000, 3d09h ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 172.16.32.1, from 10.10.8.3, 3d09h ago, via Vlan4000
      Route metric is 700, traffic share count is 1
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 detail
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0
local label info: global/23
nexthop 172.16.32.1 Vlan4000 label 39
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 internal
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0, RIB[I], refcount 5, per-destination sharing
sources: RIB, LTE
feature space:
   IPRM: 0x00028000
   LFD: 10.10.8.3/32 1 local label
   local label info: global/23
        contains path extension list
        disposition chain 0x12BB5E40
        label switch chain 0x12BB5E40
ifnums:
   Vlan4000(4144): 172.16.32.1
path 1291D528, path list 12A78CDC, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
    MPLS short path extensions: MOI flags = 0x0 label 39
nexthop 172.16.32.1 Vlan4000 label 39, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan4000, addr 172.16.32.1 12841840
output chain: label 39 TAG adj out of Vlan4000, addr 172.16.32.1 128413E0
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip cef exact-route 10.10.8.21 10.10.8.3
10.10.8.21 -> 10.10.8.3 => label 39 TAG adj out of Vlan4000, addr 172.16.32.1
Switch 24 before the command addition:
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip route 10.10.8.3
Routing entry for 10.10.8.3/32
Known via "isis", distance 115, metric 500, type level-2
Redistributing via isis
Last update from 172.16.24.149 on Vlan100, 00:03:44 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 172.16.24.149, from 10.10.8.3, 00:03:44 ago, via Vlan100
      Route metric is 500, traffic share count is 1
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 detail
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0
local label info: global/39
nexthop 172.16.24.149 Vlan100 label 302032
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 internal
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0, RIB[I], refcount 5, per-destination sharing
sources: RIB, LTE
feature space:
   IPRM: 0x00028000
   LFD: 10.10.8.3/32 1 local label
   local label info: global/39
        contains path extension list
        disposition chain 0x12B16A58
        label switch chain 0x12B16A58
ifnums:
   Vlan100(244): 172.16.24.149
path 124EF1A0, path list 12504414, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
    MPLS short path extensions: MOI flags = 0x0 label 302032
nexthop 172.16.24.149 Vlan100 label 302032, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan100, addr 172.16.24.149 128322A0
output chain: label 302032 TAG adj out of Vlan100, addr 172.16.24.149 12831E40
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip cef exact-route 10.10.8.21 10.10.8.3
10.10.8.21 -> 10.10.8.3 => label 302032 TAG adj out of Vlan100, addr 172.16.24.149
Switch 21 after the command addition:
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip route 10.10.8.3
Routing entry for 10.10.8.3/32
Known via "isis", distance 115, metric 700, type level-2
Redistributing via isis atlantech
Last update from 172.16.32.1 on Vlan4000, 3d09h ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 172.16.32.1, from 10.10.8.3, 3d09h ago, via Vlan4000
      Route metric is 700, traffic share count is 1
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 detail
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0
local label info: global/23
nexthop 172.16.32.1 Vlan4000 label 39
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 internal
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0, RIB[I], refcount 5, per-destination sharing
sources: RIB, LTE
feature space:
   IPRM: 0x00028000
   LFD: 10.10.8.3/32 1 local label
   local label info: global/23
        contains path extension list
        disposition chain 0x12BB5E40
        label switch chain 0x12BB5E40
ifnums:
   Vlan4000(4144): 172.16.32.1
path 1291D528, path list 12A78CDC, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
    MPLS short path extensions: MOI flags = 0x0 label 39
nexthop 172.16.32.1 Vlan4000 label 39, adjacency IP adj out of Vlan4000, addr 172.16.32.1 12841840
output chain: label 39 TAG adj out of Vlan4000, addr 172.16.32.1 128413E0
ME3600X-1.lab#sh ip cef exact-route 10.10.8.21 10.10.8.3
10.10.8.21 -> 10.10.8.3 => label 39 TAG adj out of Vlan4000, addr 172.16.32.1
Switch 24 after the command addition:
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip route 10.10.8.3
Routing entry for 10.10.8.3/32
Known via "isis", distance 115, metric 500, type level-2
Redistributing via isis
Last update from 10.10.8.3 on Tunnel1, 00:02:01 ago
Routing Descriptor Blocks:
* 10.10.8.3, from 10.10.8.3, 00:02:01 ago, via Tunnel1
      Route metric is 500, traffic share count is 1
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 detail
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0
local label info: global/39
nexthop 10.10.8.3 Tunnel1
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip cef 10.10.8.3 internal
10.10.8.3/32, epoch 0, RIB[I], refcount 5, per-destination sharing
sources: RIB, LTE
feature space:
   IPRM: 0x00028000
   LFD: 10.10.8.3/32 1 local label
   local label info: global/39
        contains path extension list
        disposition chain 0x12B18078
        label switch chain 0x12B16A58
ifnums:
   Tunnel1(4303)
path 124EEB80, path list 125042D4, share 1/1, type attached nexthop, for IPv4
    MPLS short path extensions: MOI flags = 0x1 label implicit-null
nexthop 10.10.8.3 Tunnel1, adjacency IP midchain out of Tunnel1 12832FC0
output chain: IP midchain out of Tunnel1 12832FC0 label 302096 TAG adj out of Vlan100, addr 172.16.24.149 12831E40
ME3600X-4.lab#sh ip cef exact-route 10.10.8.21 10.10.8.3
10.10.8.21 -> 10.10.8.3 => label 302096 TAG adj out of Vlan100, addr 172.16.24.149
5. sho mpls forwarding-table 10.10.8.3 from switch 24
ME3600X-4.lab#show mpls forwarding-table 10.10.8.3 detail
Local      Outgoing   Prefix           Bytes Label   Outgoing   Next Hop
Label      Label      or Tunnel Id     Switched      interface
39         Pop Label 10.10.8.3/32 126           Tu1        point2point
        MAC/Encaps=14/18, MRU=9000, Label Stack{302096}, via Vl100
        009069C7FC3E5017FF5A18408847 49C10000
        No output feature configured
3. Are the interfaces from 21 switch is MPLS enabled until 24 or it is like plain IP and then converted to MPLS on 24 switch?
The interface connecting the 21, 22, and 24 switches is an SVI, VLAN4000, and has 'mpls ip' configured on it. I've tried disabling MPLS on the SVI on each switch with no change.
Thanks for these commands, as some of them are new ones to me that can help me in the future.

MPLS TE: Fastreroute traffic switching to primary tunnel

I have the following question regarding MPLS-TE fastreroute.
In my scenario I have Fastreroute working perfectly, when the protected link fails traffic gets switched to the backup tunnel and when the link gets up traffic comes back to the primary tunnel. The question is... is it possible to delay the return of traffic to the primary tunnel after the protected link is up again? or even if is it possible to manually switch traffic back to the primary tunnel?
Many thanks for your support.

Hi,
There is a command to do this "mpls traffic-eng tunnels reoptimize timers frequency", if you set this timer to 0 it will never reoptimize the Tunnels even after Primary link is up. The default reoptimization timer is 3600 seconds, or one hour.
You can use "mpls traffic-engineering reoptimize" to reoptimize manually. You can either do all at once or select tunnel at a time.
Hope this was your query...
Edit:
You can use "mpls traffic-eng reoptimize" to reoptimize manually. :-)
Thanks
Cheers
~sultan

MPLS TE equal or unequal load balancing doesn't work?

Dear Sir!
I've two MPLS TE tunnels from one PE to another PE.
And there are traffic share count between them
(as tunnel mpls traffic-eng load-share command define).
But in real life all traffic from the same source to the same destination go through only one tunnel
(as CEF define - i.e. how sh ip cef exact-route says).
PEs are 3660 platforms with c3660-jk9o3s-mz.123-8.T
installed.
How can I correct this problem?
Best regards,
Maxim Denisov

Dear Sir!
I'm agree with you as MPLS TE tunnels are opened from PE to PE, so CEF does it work.
But if I open this tunnels from P to PE, ONLY ONE of this tunnels are used instead of load-sharing, if traffic go from one source (of site1 of VPN1) to the same destination (located at site2 of VPN1).
Why? Packet through P-devices swithes by labels, so I mean that CEF cannot does src-dst load sharing?
My problem are that I must to do load sharing between this two tunnels in the case above.
Q: How can I solve this problem?
Best regards,
Maxim Denisov

MPLS TE equal or unequal load balancing doesn't work? - step2

Previous question in thread:
Dear Sir!
I've two MPLS TE tunnels from one PE to another PE.
And there are traffic share count between them
(as tunnel mpls traffic-eng load-share command define).
But in real life all traffic from the same source to the same destination go through only one tunnel
(as CEF define - i.e. how sh ip cef exact-route says).
PEs are 3660 platforms with c3660-jk9o3s-mz.123-8.T
installed.
How can I correct this problem?
But this answer does not solved my issue:
hritter - Network Consulting Engineer, CISCO SYSTEMS, CCIE
Aug 4, 2004, 7:20am PST
This is expected behavior since CEF is used at the head end to perform label imposition. I wouldn't recommend changing the default bahavior to per=packet loadsharing since this could lead to of of sequence packets, which could lower the overall performance.
Hope this helps,
so my secound question:
Dear Sir!
I'm agree with you as MPLS TE tunnels are opened from PE to PE, so CEF does it work.
But if I open this tunnels from P to PE, ONLY ONE of this tunnels are used instead of load-sharing, if traffic go from one source (of site1 of VPN1) to the same destination (located at site2 of VPN1).
Why? Packet through P-devices swithes by labels, so I mean that CEF cannot does src-dst load sharing?
My problem are that I must to do load sharing between this two tunnels in the case above.
Q: How can I solve this problem?
Best regards,
Maxim Denisov

The per session load-balancing is also used by MPLS when multiple paths are available. Changing this behavior to per-packet is still not recommended.
Hope this helps,

Get the attribute_flags of the interface

Hi all,
Does anybody know how to get the value of the attribute_flags of a physical interface over which a MPLS Tunnel could traverse if the affinity bits are conformed?
I mean, when we configure with the next CLI command
Router(config-if)#mpls traffic-eng attribute-flags
the attribute-flags of an interface, that it will be later check to conform with the affinity configuration of the tunnel, How can I get the value of attribute-flags by querying a MIB? Which MIB?
Thanks to all.
Joan.

Hi,
my best bet would be 1.3.6.1.4.1.9.10.99, which is about OSPF opaque LSAs, they contain the relevant information. There is no MIB variable especially for the affinity bits on an interface as far as I know.
Hope this helps
Martin
Link: http://tools.cisco.com/Support/SNMP/do/BrowseOID.do?local=en&translate=Translate&objectInput=1.3.6.1.4.1.9.10.99

Traffic-eng

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for