Re: [mpls-linux-general] another problem in ldp_linux
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
jleu
Menu
▾
▴
Re: [mpls-linux-general] another problem in ldp_linux
|
From: James R. L. <jl...@mi...> - 2001-06-29 00:54:33
|
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 05:16:23PM -0400, Vincent Jardin wrote: > I could get quite the same problem, but there is a slight difference. I= need=20 > to configure 10.0.0.6 first. >=20 > When it does not work, I get the error: > PRT: ldp_state_recv_init: cannot find adj > on the router 10.0.0.6 when 10.0.0.5 is configured first. >=20 > Otherwise, the mpls_in is filled properly when I configure 10.0.0.6 fir= st. >=20 > In the case it works (10.0.0.6 is the first router that I configure): > 10.0.0.5 : > $ cat /proc/net/mpls_in =20 > 40004000 gen 16 0 POP DLV=20 > 40004400 gen 17 0 POP DLV=20 > 40004800 gen 18 0 POP DLV > but mpls_out, and mpls_fec remain empty. > Why ? LDP will only install out labels and bind them to a FEC if the FEC has an EXACT match in the routin table. While in ldp_linux do a 'show route'. Every LDP speaker should have the same entries. So to get LSPs to the router IDs of each LDP speaker, each LDP speaker ne= eds to have a /32 route to the router ID of the other LDP speakers. Jim >=20 > 10.0.0.6: > $ cat /proc/net/mpls_in =20 > 40004000 gen 16 0 POP DLV=20 > 40004400 gen 17 0 POP DLV=20 > 40004800 gen 18 0 POP DLV=20 > but mpls_out, and mpls_fec remain empty. > Why ? >=20 > Vincent >=20 > Le Mercredi 27 Juin 2001 05:19, Venisa Cabrilla a =E9crit : > > Jim, > > > > Sorry, another problem ... :-) > > > > I know that my problem here will seem somewhat ridiculous but I have = spent > > two and half hours just to find my mistakes ... > > > > Please refer to the same configuration I gave you before, but now wit= h > > mplsadm of course : > > > > > > lo 10.0.0.6 lo 10.0.0.5 > > --------- --------- > > > > | Router2 |----------------| Router1 | > > > > --------- --------- > > > > |eth2 192.168.12.0/24 |eth1 > > > > --------------------------------------- > > > > In router1: > > bashH ifconfig lo 10.0.0.5 netmask 255.255.255.255 > > bashH route add 10.0.0.6 gw 192.168.12.2 > > bashH mplsadm -L eth1:0 > > > > >From inside ldp_linux: > > > > prompt> add global 10.0.0.5 > > prompt> add interface eth1 > > > > In router2: > > bashH ifconfig lo 10.0.0.6 netmask 255.255.255.255 > > bashH route add 10.0.0.5 gw 192.168.12.1 > > bashH mplsadm -L eth2:0 > > > > >From inside ldp_linux: > > > > prompt> add global 10.0.0.6 > > prompt> add interface eth2 > > > > I do not know if the order of which we run and configure ldp_linux wi= ll > > certainly determine the result, but in my case, yes ! > > > > There are two possible cases, we run and configure ldp_linux first in > > router1 and then in router2, the other, we run and configure ldp_linu= x in > > router2 and then router1. What I mean by running and configuring ldp_= linux > > here is that we type add global ... and add interface ... > > > > First, we run and configure ldp_linux first in router1(10.0.0.5) and = then > > in router2 (10.0.0.6), ldp_linux works well, I can see that mpls_* ar= e not > > empty and I can ping the machines. I can see the label mapping proces= s both > > within ldp_linux or by using ethereal. Everything seems right on its = path. > > > > Second, we run and configure ldp_linux first in router2(10.0.0.6) and= then > > in router1(10.0.0.1), well here comes the problem, mpls_* rest empty = and I > > can only see hello messages using ethereal, nothing else. > > There is no label mapping process and ldp_linux seems too quiet ... > > Here is the last captured messages inside ldp_linux in both routers : > > > > .... > > EXIT: ldp_buf_message > > EXIT: ldp_event > > > > After that, nothing. > > > > I have tried to figure out the reason but still cannot get it. I am s= ure > > that I use the same linux kernel and the same mpls patch in both rout= ers if > > it might be the problem. > > > > Is it possible that the problem might come from ldp_linux's init mess= ages, > > since for determining the host that will be active or passive for sta= rting > > the init message you should compare the host addresses (I might be wr= ong) ? > > Or simply, the host (interface) that start sending hello messages wil= l > > eventually become the active host for init message ? > > > > Please give me some clues. In my part, I will start looking your code= s. > > > > > > regards, > > ~Venisa Cabrilla > > _____________________________________________________________________= ____ > > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.= com. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls-linux-general mailing list > > mpls-linux-generalOlists.sourceforge.net > > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general >=20 > _______________________________________________ > mpls-linux-general mailing list > mpls-linux-generalOlists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general --=20 James R. Leu |
