[mpls-linux-general] ldp_linux problem
Status: Beta
Brought to you by:
jleu
|
From: Yvan P. <yv...@vi...> - 2001-07-09 13:37:28
|
Hi,
I tried ldp_linux on my testbed with 3 routers (2 LERs + 1 LSR) but I got
a problem with the LSR.
Topology:
(networks 10.0.a.0 with netmask 255.255.255.0 for each subnet 10.0.a.0)
Host1 eth1---eth1 LERA eth2---eth2 LSR eth3---eth3 LERB eth4---eth4 Host2
1.1 1.2 2.1 2.2 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2
The problem is that there is no label swapping at the LSR on packets from
LER B to LER A. The LSR swaps labels correctly for packets from LER A to
LER B:
(ping from LER A to LER B with route recording on)
$ ping -R -c1 10.0.4.2
PING 10.0.4.2 (10.0.4.2) from 10.0.1.1 : 56(124) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.4.2: icmp_seq=0 ttl=253 time=0.5 ms
RR: 10.0.1.1
10.0.2.1
10.0.3.1 --> due to no label swapping by the LSR
10.0.4.1
10.0.4.2
10.0.4.2
10.0.3.2 --> 10.0.2.2 is absent (expected)
10.0.1.2
10.0.1.1
contents of /proc/net/mpls_*:
* on LER A
LABELSPACE:
eth2 0
FEC:
40004804 10.0.3.0/24
40004c04 10.0.4.0/24
TUNNEL:
IN:
40004000 gen 16 0 POP DLV
40004400 gen 17 0 POP DLV
40004800 gen 18 0 POP DLV
40004c00 gen 19 0 POP DLV
40005000 gen 20 0 POP DLV
OUT:
40004804 PUSH(gen 18) SET(eth2)
40004c04 PUSH(gen 19) SET(eth2)
* on LSR
LABELSPACE:
eth2 0
eth3 0
FEC:
40004404 10.0.1.0/24
40004805 10.0.4.0/24
TUNNEL:
IN:
40004000 gen 16 0 POP DLV
40004400 gen 17 0 POP DLV
40004800 gen 18 0 POP DLV
40004c00 gen 19 0 POP DLV
40005000 gen 20 0 POP DLV
40005400 gen 21 0 POP DLV
40005800 gen 22 0 POP DLV
40005c00 gen 23 0 POP FWD(40004404)
40006000 gen 24 0 POP DLV
40006400 gen 25 0 POP DLV
40006800 gen 26 0 POP DLV
40006c00 gen 27 0 POP DLV
OUT:
40004404 PUSH(gen 17) SET(eth2)
40004805 PUSH(gen 18) SET(eth3)
* On LER B
LABELSPACE:
eth3 0
FEC:
40005c05 10.0.1.0/24
40006005 10.0.2.0/24
TUNNEL:
IN:
40004000 gen 16 0 POP DLV
40004400 gen 17 0 POP DLV
40004800 gen 18 0 POP DLV
40004c00 gen 19 0 POP DLV
40005000 gen 20 0 POP DLV
OUT:
40005c05 PUSH(gen 23) SET(eth3)
40006005 PUSH(gen 24) SET(eth3)
Routing tables (only the information about subnets 10.0.x.0 is relevant):
LER A
$ route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Iface
10.0.4.0 10.0.2.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 eth2
10.0.1.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 eth1
10.0.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 eth2
10.0.3.0 10.0.2.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 eth2
LSR
$ route
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Iface
10.0.4.0 10.0.3.2 255.255.255.0 UG 0 eth3
10.0.1.0 10.0.2.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 eth2
10.0.2.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 eth2
10.0.3.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 eth3
LER B
Kernel IP routing table
Destination Gateway Genmask Flags Metric Iface
10.0.4.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 eth4
10.0.1.0 10.0.3.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 eth3
10.0.2.0 10.0.3.1 255.255.255.0 UG 0 eth3
10.0.3.0 * 255.255.255.0 U 0 eth3
The routing tables are symetric, but the label bindings are not !
Do you have an explication about this behavior ? why is an entry in the
LSR label forwarding table missing ?
Thanks,
Yvan Pointurier
________________________________________________________________________
yv...@po... University of Virginia
http://www.pointurier.org Department of Computer Science
|