[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 |