mpls-linux-general — Mailing list for general discussion about MPLS for Linux

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Problem installing zebra-ldp

[Miguel G. <mg...@fi...>]

Hi Jim,
I'm almost sure that the zebra make file is point to my mpls-linux enabled
kernel.
Here's what I think is the problem:
list_head is defined in /usr/src/linux/include/linux/list.
strust list_head {
	struct list_head *next, *prev;
};
I think that the problem is that in timer.h, 'list' is declared as:
struct list_head list;
when it should be: struct list_head *list;
Perhaps your gcc interpretes it properly. My version is 2.96, what's
yours?
When I correct it, it works but I get another error,
it seems that u32 (which appears in mpls.h)is not defined, I believe
(correct me if I'm wrong) that
it is supposed to be an unsigned integer, (I've got guint32 defined in
glibconfig.h). The version of gclib I have is 2.0. Maybe it is too old.
What version are you using?
Could that be the problem?
Thanks,
Miguel.


On Thu, 12 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:

> Make sure the zebra make file is point to you mpls-linux enabled kernel source.
>
> Btw what version of glibc and gcc do you have?
>
> Jim
>
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 11:29:31AM -0300, Miguel Griot wrote:
> > Hi,
> > We are trying to install ldp-portable-0.200. We've already installed
> > mpls-linux-1.170 over kernel-2.4.18, and it is working.
> > The problem is that, after patching zebra-0.93a,  when we try to compile
> > it, it gives us this error message:
> > /usr/src/linux/timer.h:17: field 'list' has incomplete type
> > /usr/src/linux/timer.h:21: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
> > make[2]:*** [vty.o] Error 1
> > make[1]:*** [all-recursive] Error 1
> >
> > list is defined as a list_head which is defined in linux/list.h.
> >
> > We will appreciate any help.
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Gabriel, Santiago and Miguel.
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> > Welcome to geek heaven.
> > http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls-linux-general mailing list
> > mpl...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
>
> --
> James R. Leu
>

[mpls-linux-general] Silly question about CVS checkout

[Josip G. <gr...@te...>]

Hi!

There's something I don't understand.  From the web page, I can see that
the current release of ldp-portable is 0.200 and of mpls-linux is 1.170.
But there seem to be no such tags in the repository.  For example,

cvs -z3
-d:pserver:ano...@cv...:/cvsroot/mpls-linux co
-r ldp-portable_0_200 ldp-portable

gives me 

cvs [server aborted]: no such tag ldp-portable_0_200

I can successfully check out only ldp-portable_0_100.  And after I do
that, "cvs update -r ldp-portable_0_200" gives me 'no such tag' again.

Checking with "cvs log" doesn't show any tags greater than 0.100 for ldp
and 1.152 for mpls.

So, how do I get the latest version through cvs?

Thanks!
Josip

Re: [mpls-linux-general] packets not delivered to layer 3 (??)

[<sam...@ya...>]

Hi James,
I tried executing the command in two steps. But no
luck! This is what I get...

#mplsadm2 -A -O 0
Key: x00000000    (all zeroes!!)
Out Segment add: Success

But it adds an entry to /cat/proc/mpls_out i.e.
0x00000007 0/0/0 1

Then,
#mplsadm2 -O 0x00000007 -o
push:gen:100:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.198
Out Instr: Success

But the entry in /cat/proc/mpls_out remains
0x00000007 0/0/0 1

So, the two step process didn't work. But, could you
explain, why is this happening only on machine B?! Set
up of LSP works fine on machine A. Moreover the
addition of incoming label on machine B works fine
too. Only the addition of outgoing label on machine B
causes problem!
Strange!

Again, thanking in anticipation! :-)
cheers,
Sameer


 --- "James R. Leu" <jl...@mi...> wrote: > I
think I have a bug in mplsadm2.
> 
> try doing the command as two steps:
> 
> mplsadm2 -A -O 0
> <returns key>
> mplsadm2 -O key -o
> push:gen:100:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.198
> 
> Jim
> 
> > mplsadm2 -A -O 0 -o
> > push:gen:100:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.198
> > You can refer below in the mail to check out the
> > topology and the addresses... the example is the
> same.
> > So, when I give this command, I get...
> > Key: 0x00000000
> > Out Segment add: Success
> > Out Instr: Illegal seek
> > 
> > And /proc/net/mpls_out contains the following line
> > after tha above command is executed...
> > 0x00000002 0/0/0 1
> > 
> > What could be the problem here?
> > 
> > Thanking you in anticipation
> > 
> > cheers,
> > Sameer
> > 
> > 
> > > On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 06:59:26AM +0100, Sameer
> > > Gharat wrote:
> > > > Hello James and all,
> > > > 
> > > > I have set up 1.152 on two Linux boxes running
> > > kernel
> > > > ver. 2.4.18-3. The two boxes are set up as...
> > > >  ---------             ---------
> > > >  |   A   |             |   B   |
> > > >  ---------             ---------
> > > >      |eth0                 |eth0
> > > >      |10.3.8.198           |10.3.8.93
> > > > -----------------------------------
> > > >          
> > > > And the lsp was created b/w A and B using...
> > > > On A :
> > > > mplsadm2 -A -O -o
> > > push:gen:200:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.93
> > > > ip2 route add 10.3.8.93 dev eth0 lsp
> 0x00000002
> > > > mpls -L eth0:0
> > > > 
> > > > On B:
> > > > mplsadm2 -A -I gen:200:0
> > > > mpls -L eth0:0
> > > > 


________________________________________________________________________
Missed your favourite TV serial last night? Try the new, Yahoo! TV.
       visit http://in.tv.yahoo.com

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Question about ldp_range (ldp_range.c)

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

The label allocation is controlled via the mpls porting layer
(in the zebra-ldp case it is in impl_mpls.)

Jim

On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 12:04:55PM +0800, Kenny wrote:
> 
> Could you please tell me now  who control the label range and where it
> is in the code? Thanks.
> 
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 23:16:50 -0500
> "James R. Leu" <jl...@mi...> wrote:
> 
> You caugth me.  In fact the label range isn't even used any where in the
> code.  I'm thinking of getting rid of it.  I'm thinking that the label
> range should be controlled by the label manager.  From ldp-portable's
> perspective the label manager is an outside entity and ldp-portable
> should know nothing of it.
> 
> Anyone care to comment?
> 
> Jim
> 
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 10:14:45AM +0800, Kenny wrote:
> > Hi Jim,
> > 
> > When I was tracing ldp-portable, I found something strange.
> > Why the both min_gen and max_gen of ldp_range are assigned to
> > LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN?
> > 
> > Please see the "case LDP_GENERIC:" in the following code.
> > 
> > Best Regards,
> > Kenny
> > 
> > ---------------------ldp_range.c------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ldp_range *ldp_range_create(int32_t label_space, ldp_label_range_type
> > type)
> > {
> >   ldp_range *r = (ldp_range *) ldp_malloc(sizeof(ldp_range));
> > 
> >   if (r) {
> >     LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->peer_root, ldp_peer);
> >     LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->if_root, ldp_if);
> >     LDP_REFCNT_INIT(r, 0);
> > 
> >     r->label_space = label_space;
> >     r->type = type;
> >     switch (type) {
> >       case LDP_GENERIC:
> >         r->min.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
> >         r->max.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
> >         break;
> >       case LDP_ATM_VP:
> >         r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
> >         r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
> >         break;
> >       case LDP_ATM_VC:
> >         r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
> >         r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
> >         break;
> >       case LDP_ATM_VP_VC:
> >         r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
> >         r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
> >         r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
> >         r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
> >         break;
> >       case LDP_FR_10:
> >         r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
> >         r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_10_MAX;
> >         break;
> >       case LDP_FR_24:
> >         r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
> >         r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_24_MAX;
> >         break;
> >       default:
> >         ldp_free(r);
> >         return NULL;
> >     }
> >   }
> >   return r;
> > }
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > In remembrance
> > www.osdn.com/911/
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls-linux-general mailing list
> > mpl...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
> 
> -- 
> James R. Leu
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In remembrance
> www.osdn.com/911/
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] packets not delivered to layer 3 (??)

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

I think I have a bug in mplsadm2.

try doing the command as two steps:

mplsadm2 -A -O 0
<returns key>
mplsadm2 -O key -o push:gen:100:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.198

Jim

> mplsadm2 -A -O 0 -o
> push:gen:100:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.198
> You can refer below in the mail to check out the
> topology and the addresses... the example is the same.
> So, when I give this command, I get...
> Key: 0x00000000
> Out Segment add: Success
> Out Instr: Illegal seek
> 
> And /proc/net/mpls_out contains the following line
> after tha above command is executed...
> 0x00000002 0/0/0 1
> 
> What could be the problem here?
> 
> Thanking you in anticipation
> 
> cheers,
> Sameer
> 
> 
> --- "James R. Leu" <jl...@mi...> wrote:
> > You can make sure the packets are being sent/recv'd
> > on the LSP by looking
> > at the counters in /proc/net/mpls_in and
> > /proc/net/mpls_out.  After you
> > have verified that, then you can try turning on mpls
> > kernel debugging
> > by doing a 'mplsadm2 -d' this will toggle debuggin
> > to on.  execute again to
> > turn it off.  Look to you kernel console log for the
> > output or just do dmesg.
> > 
> > Jim
> > 
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 06:59:26AM +0100, Sameer
> > Gharat wrote:
> > > Hello James and all,
> > > 
> > > I have set up 1.152 on two Linux boxes running
> > kernel
> > > ver. 2.4.18-3. The two boxes are set up as...
> > >  ---------             ---------
> > >  |   A   |             |   B   |
> > >  ---------             ---------
> > >      |eth0                 |eth0
> > >      |10.3.8.198           |10.3.8.93
> > > -----------------------------------
> > >          
> > > And the lsp was created b/w A and B using...
> > > On A :
> > > mplsadm2 -A -O -o
> > push:gen:200:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.93
> > > ip2 route add 10.3.8.93 dev eth0 lsp 0x00000002
> > > mpls -L eth0:0
> > > 
> > > On B:
> > > mplsadm2 -A -I gen:200:0
> > > mpls -L eth0:0
> > > 
> > > I believe these commands are enough to create an
> > LSP
> > > between A & B... or at least I hope so.
> > > 
> > > Now, when I try to Ping B from A, the packets
> > reach B,
> > > but it seems the packets are not delivered
> > correctly
> > > up to layer 3 on B. The result is that the
> > > acknowledgement doesn't reach back to A and A
> > shows
> > > 100% packet loss. If I try to ping A from B, then
> > the
> > > ping packets reach A and come back to B (taking
> > the
> > > lsp from A to B). But again, the packets aren't
> > > recognized by B and again ping shows 100% packet
> > loss.
> > > Similar thing happens when I tried injecting
> > packets
> > > using nemesis tools.
> > > 
> > > Is there any problem with the way I've set up the
> > LSP
> > > or is it some other problem?
> > > 
> > > Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > Sameer
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> > -- 
> > James R. Leu
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
> http://news.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Problem installing zebra-ldp

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

Make sure the zebra make file is point to you mpls-linux enabled kernel source.

Btw what version of glibc and gcc do you have?

Jim

On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 11:29:31AM -0300, Miguel Griot wrote:
> Hi,
> We are trying to install ldp-portable-0.200. We've already installed
> mpls-linux-1.170 over kernel-2.4.18, and it is working.
> The problem is that, after patching zebra-0.93a,  when we try to compile
> it, it gives us this error message:
> /usr/src/linux/timer.h:17: field 'list' has incomplete type
> /usr/src/linux/timer.h:21: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
> make[2]:*** [vty.o] Error 1
> make[1]:*** [all-recursive] Error 1
> 
> list is defined as a list_head which is defined in linux/list.h.
> 
> We will appreciate any help.
> Thank you,
> 
> Gabriel, Santiago and Miguel.
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Problem with MPLS

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

List the commands your typing in then show the output of:

cat /proc/net/mpls*
ip route show

Jim

On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 03:52:53PM +0100, Gilles Noutcha wrote:
> 
>  Hi all,
>  I use mplsadm2 utility to set up my LSPs, and iproute2 to configure the
>  routes.All works well, When i ping one host in mpls network, all the
>  counters of 'mpls_in' & 'mpls_out' files on each host still in
>  '0/0/0'.What's happend.Nevertheless When i run mplsadm2 with '-d'
> option. All the tasks are completed succesfully. Could someone explain me
> what's wrong either in kernel or mpls.
> Cheers.
> Gilles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
> Welcome to geek heaven.
> http://thinkgeek.com/sf
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

[mpls-linux-general] Problem with MPLS

[Gilles N. <gno...@ee...>]

 Hi all,
 I use mplsadm2 utility to set up my LSPs, and iproute2 to configure the
 routes.All works well, When i ping one host in mpls network, all the
 counters of 'mpls_in' & 'mpls_out' files on each host still in
 '0/0/0'.What's happend.Nevertheless When i run mplsadm2 with '-d'
option. All the tasks are completed succesfully. Could someone explain me
what's wrong either in kernel or mpls.
Cheers.
Gilles

[mpls-linux-general] Problem installing zebra-ldp

[Miguel G. <mg...@fi...>]

Hi,
We are trying to install ldp-portable-0.200. We've already installed
mpls-linux-1.170 over kernel-2.4.18, and it is working.
The problem is that, after patching zebra-0.93a,  when we try to compile
it, it gives us this error message:
/usr/src/linux/timer.h:17: field 'list' has incomplete type
/usr/src/linux/timer.h:21: confused by earlier errors, bailing out
make[2]:*** [vty.o] Error 1
make[1]:*** [all-recursive] Error 1

list is defined as a list_head which is defined in linux/list.h.

We will appreciate any help.
Thank you,

Gabriel, Santiago and Miguel.

Re: [mpls-linux-general] packets not delivered to layer 3 (??)

[Sameer G. <sam...@ya...>]

Hello James and everybody,

Thanks a ton James for the prompt response. I got
1.170 and patched it onto a 2.4.19 kernel and
duplicated the tests. And guess what, it worked!!
But I believe that the earlier fault was due to my
fault. I wrongly entered the instruction on B as DLV
instead of POP:DLV or POP:PEEK. So, i guess the
packets were apparently being delivered to layer 3
without popping off the label. And hence the dropping
of packets.
But now a different problem has cropped up.
LSP from A to B works fine. But when I try to setup an
LSP from B to A, it gives an error.
the command I give is...
mplsadm2 -A -O 0 -o
push:gen:100:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.198
You can refer below in the mail to check out the
topology and the addresses... the example is the same.
So, when I give this command, I get...
Key: 0x00000000
Out Segment add: Success
Out Instr: Illegal seek

And /proc/net/mpls_out contains the following line
after tha above command is executed...
0x00000002 0/0/0 1

What could be the problem here?

Thanking you in anticipation

cheers,
Sameer


--- "James R. Leu" <jl...@mi...> wrote:
> You can make sure the packets are being sent/recv'd
> on the LSP by looking
> at the counters in /proc/net/mpls_in and
> /proc/net/mpls_out.  After you
> have verified that, then you can try turning on mpls
> kernel debugging
> by doing a 'mplsadm2 -d' this will toggle debuggin
> to on.  execute again to
> turn it off.  Look to you kernel console log for the
> output or just do dmesg.
> 
> Jim
> 
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 06:59:26AM +0100, Sameer
> Gharat wrote:
> > Hello James and all,
> > 
> > I have set up 1.152 on two Linux boxes running
> kernel
> > ver. 2.4.18-3. The two boxes are set up as...
> >  ---------             ---------
> >  |   A   |             |   B   |
> >  ---------             ---------
> >      |eth0                 |eth0
> >      |10.3.8.198           |10.3.8.93
> > -----------------------------------
> >          
> > And the lsp was created b/w A and B using...
> > On A :
> > mplsadm2 -A -O -o
> push:gen:200:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.93
> > ip2 route add 10.3.8.93 dev eth0 lsp 0x00000002
> > mpls -L eth0:0
> > 
> > On B:
> > mplsadm2 -A -I gen:200:0
> > mpls -L eth0:0
> > 
> > I believe these commands are enough to create an
> LSP
> > between A & B... or at least I hope so.
> > 
> > Now, when I try to Ping B from A, the packets
> reach B,
> > but it seems the packets are not delivered
> correctly
> > up to layer 3 on B. The result is that the
> > acknowledgement doesn't reach back to A and A
> shows
> > 100% packet loss. If I try to ping A from B, then
> the
> > ping packets reach A and come back to B (taking
> the
> > lsp from A to B). But again, the packets aren't
> > recognized by B and again ping shows 100% packet
> loss.
> > Similar thing happens when I tried injecting
> packets
> > using nemesis tools.
> > 
> > Is there any problem with the way I've set up the
> LSP
> > or is it some other problem?
> > 
> > Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Sameer
> > 
> > 
> >
> -- 
> James R. Leu


__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
http://news.yahoo.com

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Mpls+Ethereal??

[Gilles N. <gno...@ee...>]

On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:

> You can make sure traffic is using an LSP by looking at the packet/byte
> counters in /proc/net/mpls_in and /proc/net/mpls_out.
> Also you can trun on mpls kernel debuggin by doing 'mplsadm2 -d'
>
> Make sure to read the NOTE file in the mpls-linux directory.
>
> Jim

Hi Jim,
I use mplsadm2 utility to set up my LSPs, and iproute2 to configure the
routes.All work well, When i ping one host in mpls network, all the
counters of 'mpls_in' & 'mpls_out' files on each host still in
'0/0/0'.What's happend.
N.B.:I've stopped running ethereal.

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Question about ldp_range (ldp_range.c)

[Kenny <chi...@it...>]

Could you please tell me now  who control the label range and where it
is in the code? Thanks.

On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 23:16:50 -0500
"James R. Leu" <jl...@mi...> wrote:

You caugth me.  In fact the label range isn't even used any where in the
code.  I'm thinking of getting rid of it.  I'm thinking that the label
range should be controlled by the label manager.  From ldp-portable's
perspective the label manager is an outside entity and ldp-portable
should know nothing of it.

Anyone care to comment?

Jim

On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 10:14:45AM +0800, Kenny wrote:
> Hi Jim,
> 
> When I was tracing ldp-portable, I found something strange.
> Why the both min_gen and max_gen of ldp_range are assigned to
> LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN?
> 
> Please see the "case LDP_GENERIC:" in the following code.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Kenny
> 
> ---------------------ldp_range.c------------------------------------------------------------------
> ldp_range *ldp_range_create(int32_t label_space, ldp_label_range_type
> type)
> {
>   ldp_range *r = (ldp_range *) ldp_malloc(sizeof(ldp_range));
> 
>   if (r) {
>     LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->peer_root, ldp_peer);
>     LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->if_root, ldp_if);
>     LDP_REFCNT_INIT(r, 0);
> 
>     r->label_space = label_space;
>     r->type = type;
>     switch (type) {
>       case LDP_GENERIC:
>         r->min.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
>         r->max.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
>         break;
>       case LDP_ATM_VP:
>         r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_ATM_VC:
>         r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_ATM_VP_VC:
>         r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
>         r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_FR_10:
>         r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
>         r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_10_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_FR_24:
>         r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
>         r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_24_MAX;
>         break;
>       default:
>         ldp_free(r);
>         return NULL;
>     }
>   }
>   return r;
> }
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In remembrance
> www.osdn.com/911/
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu


-------------------------------------------------------
In remembrance
www.osdn.com/911/
_______________________________________________
mpls-linux-general mailing list
mpl...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Question about ldp_range (ldp_range.c)

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

You caugth me.  In fact the label range isn't even used any where in the
code.  I'm thinking of getting rid of it.  I'm thinking that the label
range should be controlled by the label manager.  From ldp-portable's
perspective the label manager is an outside entity and ldp-portable
should know nothing of it.

Anyone care to comment?

Jim

On Thu, Sep 12, 2002 at 10:14:45AM +0800, Kenny wrote:
> Hi Jim,
> 
> When I was tracing ldp-portable, I found something strange.
> Why the both min_gen and max_gen of ldp_range are assigned to
> LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN?
> 
> Please see the "case LDP_GENERIC:" in the following code.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Kenny
> 
> ---------------------ldp_range.c------------------------------------------------------------------
> ldp_range *ldp_range_create(int32_t label_space, ldp_label_range_type
> type)
> {
>   ldp_range *r = (ldp_range *) ldp_malloc(sizeof(ldp_range));
> 
>   if (r) {
>     LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->peer_root, ldp_peer);
>     LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->if_root, ldp_if);
>     LDP_REFCNT_INIT(r, 0);
> 
>     r->label_space = label_space;
>     r->type = type;
>     switch (type) {
>       case LDP_GENERIC:
>         r->min.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
>         r->max.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
>         break;
>       case LDP_ATM_VP:
>         r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_ATM_VC:
>         r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_ATM_VP_VC:
>         r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
>         r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
>         r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_FR_10:
>         r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
>         r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_10_MAX;
>         break;
>       case LDP_FR_24:
>         r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
>         r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_24_MAX;
>         break;
>       default:
>         ldp_free(r);
>         return NULL;
>     }
>   }
>   return r;
> }
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In remembrance
> www.osdn.com/911/
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

[mpls-linux-general] Question about ldp_range (ldp_range.c)

[Kenny <chi...@it...>]

Hi Jim,

When I was tracing ldp-portable, I found something strange.
Why the both min_gen and max_gen of ldp_range are assigned to
LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN?

Please see the "case LDP_GENERIC:" in the following code.

Best Regards,
Kenny

---------------------ldp_range.c------------------------------------------------------------------
ldp_range *ldp_range_create(int32_t label_space, ldp_label_range_type
type)
{
  ldp_range *r = (ldp_range *) ldp_malloc(sizeof(ldp_range));

  if (r) {
    LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->peer_root, ldp_peer);
    LDP_LIST_INIT(&r->if_root, ldp_if);
    LDP_REFCNT_INIT(r, 0);

    r->label_space = label_space;
    r->type = type;
    switch (type) {
      case LDP_GENERIC:
        r->min.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
        r->max.gen = LDP_RANGE_DEF_GEN_MIN;
        break;
      case LDP_ATM_VP:
        r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
        r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
        break;
      case LDP_ATM_VC:
        r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
        r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
        break;
      case LDP_ATM_VP_VC:
        r->min.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MIN;
        r->max.atm.vpi = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VPI_MAX;
        r->min.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MIN;
        r->max.atm.vci = LDP_RANGE_DEF_ATM_VCI_MAX;
        break;
      case LDP_FR_10:
        r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
        r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_10_MAX;
        break;
      case LDP_FR_24:
        r->min.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_MIN;
        r->max.fr = LDP_RANGE_DEF_FR_24_MAX;
        break;
      default:
        ldp_free(r);
        return NULL;
    }
  }
  return r;
}

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Mpls+Ethereal??

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

On Mon, Sep 09, 2002 at 09:08:22PM +0100, Gilles Noutcha wrote:
> Hello,
> I've tried to install a test bed of MPLS. Up to now all seems to go well
> (Kernel 2.4.17 & mpls-linux-1.1 's compilation,Labels' add). To know if the flow
> of the traffic uses mpls protocol, i've setup ethereal in each host of the
> network. While i ping one host ethereal sniff well all the packets but
> doesn't display a mpls flag to be sure that it's working.Could someone
> tell me all the steps to follow in order to filter mpls packet.
> P.S. For information i think to have well set up all the LSPs'.

You can make sure traffic is using an LSP by looking at the packet/byte
counters in /proc/net/mpls_in and /proc/net/mpls_out.
Also you can trun on mpls kernel debuggin by doing 'mplsadm2 -d'

Make sure to read the NOTE file in the mpls-linux directory.

Jim

> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old
> cell phone?  Get a new here for FREE!
> https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] trouble setting up LSPs

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

Hmmm.

Ok lets look at /proc/net/rt_cache  find the entries that match the
source and dest of the ftp session.

I'll need the info from both ends.

Also try running the transfer with mpls kernel debugging turned
on 'mplsadm2 -d'

Jim

On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 08:44:21PM -0400, Wayne W. Szeto wrote:
> 
> I checked the drop counter on the outlabels on all the machines and they
> are all zero.  The following are from /proc/net/mpls* on each machine:
> 
> 
> On A:
> =====
> [wwszeto@csgradpc03 net]$ more mpls_*
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_in
> ::::::::::::::
> 0x40005000 7533/10804580/0 gen 20 0 7534 POP PEEK
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_labelspace
> ::::::::::::::
> eth0    0       12
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_out
> ::::::::::::::
> 0x00000006 4126/219279/0 1 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth0,10.0.0.20)
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_tunnel
> ::::::::::::::
> [wwszeto@csgradpc03 net]$ ip2 route
> 10.0.1.30 via 10.0.0.20 dev eth0 lsp 0x6
> 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> 129.97.78.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth3  scope link
> 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> default dev eth1  scope link
> 
> On B:
> =====
> [root@node02 net]# more mpls*
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_in
> ::::::::::::::
> 0x40004000 4126/235805/0 gen 16 0 1 POP FWD(0x00000002)
> 0x40005000 7533/10804580/0 gen 20 0 1 POP FWD(0x00000003)
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_labelspace
> ::::::::::::::
> eth0    0       9
> eth1    0       8
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_out
> ::::::::::::::
> 0x00000002 4126/219301/0 2 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth1,10.0.1.30)
> 0x00000003 7533/10774448/0 2 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth0,10.0.0.10)
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_tunnel
> ::::::::::::::
> [root@node02 net]# ip2 route
> 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> 
> On C:
> =====
> [root@node03 net]# more mpls*
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_in
> ::::::::::::::
> 0x40004000 4126/265835/0 gen 16 0 4127 POP PEEK
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_labelspace
> ::::::::::::::
> eth1    0       9
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_out
> ::::::::::::::
> 0x00000003 7575/10783790/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth1,10.0.1.20)
> ::::::::::::::
> mpls_tunnel
> ::::::::::::::
> [root@node03 net]# ip2 route
> 10.0.0.10 via 10.0.1.20 dev eth1 lsp 0x3
> 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> 
> 
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> 
> > OK.  So the bug must still exist.  What are the symptoms you see?
> > Are there any kernel opps?  My guess is that mpls-linux is dropping
> > the frames because it thinks they are too big (>MTU).  So you should
> > see the drop counter increasing on an outlabel somewhere in the network.
> > (in /proc/net/mpls_out their is a trio of numbers for each entry in the
> > form 0/0/0, drops is the last number)
> >
> > Jim
> >

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] trouble setting up LSPs

[Wayne W. S. <ww...@ho...>]

I checked the drop counter on the outlabels on all the machines and they
are all zero.  The following are from /proc/net/mpls* on each machine:


On A:
=====
[wwszeto@csgradpc03 net]$ more mpls_*
::::::::::::::
mpls_in
::::::::::::::
0x40005000 7533/10804580/0 gen 20 0 7534 POP PEEK
::::::::::::::
mpls_labelspace
::::::::::::::
eth0    0       12
::::::::::::::
mpls_out
::::::::::::::
0x00000006 4126/219279/0 1 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth0,10.0.0.20)
::::::::::::::
mpls_tunnel
::::::::::::::
[wwszeto@csgradpc03 net]$ ip2 route
10.0.1.30 via 10.0.0.20 dev eth0 lsp 0x6
10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
10.0.1.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
129.97.78.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
10.1.0.0/24 dev eth3  scope link
127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
default dev eth1  scope link

On B:
=====
[root@node02 net]# more mpls*
::::::::::::::
mpls_in
::::::::::::::
0x40004000 4126/235805/0 gen 16 0 1 POP FWD(0x00000002)
0x40005000 7533/10804580/0 gen 20 0 1 POP FWD(0x00000003)
::::::::::::::
mpls_labelspace
::::::::::::::
eth0    0       9
eth1    0       8
::::::::::::::
mpls_out
::::::::::::::
0x00000002 4126/219301/0 2 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth1,10.0.1.30)
0x00000003 7533/10774448/0 2 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth0,10.0.0.10)
::::::::::::::
mpls_tunnel
::::::::::::::
[root@node02 net]# ip2 route
10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0

On C:
=====
[root@node03 net]# more mpls*
::::::::::::::
mpls_in
::::::::::::::
0x40004000 4126/265835/0 gen 16 0 4127 POP PEEK
::::::::::::::
mpls_labelspace
::::::::::::::
eth1    0       9
::::::::::::::
mpls_out
::::::::::::::
0x00000003 7575/10783790/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth1,10.0.1.20)
::::::::::::::
mpls_tunnel
::::::::::::::
[root@node03 net]# ip2 route
10.0.0.10 via 10.0.1.20 dev eth1 lsp 0x3
10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0


On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:

> OK.  So the bug must still exist.  What are the symptoms you see?
> Are there any kernel opps?  My guess is that mpls-linux is dropping
> the frames because it thinks they are too big (>MTU).  So you should
> see the drop counter increasing on an outlabel somewhere in the network.
> (in /proc/net/mpls_out their is a trio of numbers for each entry in the
> form 0/0/0, drops is the last number)
>
> Jim
>

Re: [mpls-linux-general] trouble setting up LSPs

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

OK.  So the bug must still exist.  What are the symptoms you see?
Are there any kernel opps?  My guess is that mpls-linux is dropping
the frames because it thinks they are too big (>MTU).  So you should
see the drop counter increasing on an outlabel somewhere in the network.
(in /proc/net/mpls_out their is a trio of numbers for each entry in the
form 0/0/0, drops is the last number)

Jim

On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 06:09:33PM -0400, Wayne W. Szeto wrote:
> I am using v1.17.  I downloaded it from sourceforge 2 days ago.
> 
> 
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> 
> > You probably answered this for me already but what version are you using?
> > I thought I had this fixed.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 12:55:17PM -0400, Wayne W. Szeto wrote:
> > >
> > > Ok that fixes the ping problem, thank you.  Now I am able to ping C from A
> > > and vice versa.  However I notice that I can not ftp files > 1Mb along
> > > the estalished LSP (from A to C or C to A).  Of course ftp works fine
> > > between A and B, and B and C.  Any ideas on whats wrong?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> > >
> > > > See comments inline:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > mpls_out
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > 0x00000005 55/4620/0 3 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth0,10.0.0.20)
> > > >              ^^^^^^^
> > > >              means traffic was sent on this outlabel
> > > >
> > > > > 10.0.1.30 via 10.0.0.20 dev eth0 lsp 0x5
> > > >                                        ^^^
> > > >                                        looks right
> > > >
> > > > > mpls_in
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > 0x40004000 55/4840/0 gen 16 0 56 POP PEEK
> > > >              ^^^^^^^                   ^^^^
> > > >              means we recv traffic     No no, you want this to say FWD ...
> > > >
> > > > mplsadm2 -I gen:16:0 -O 0x2 -B
> > > >
> > > > will XC gen:16:0 to outlabel with index 0x2
> > > >
> > > > Start with that fix.
> > > >
> > > > Jim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > 0x40005000 0/0/0 gen 20 0 1 POP PEEK
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_labelspace
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > eth0    0       9
> > > > > eth1    0       8
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_out
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > 0x00000002 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth1,10.0.1.30)
> > > > > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth0,10.0.0.10)
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_tunnel
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > [root@node02 net]# ip2 route
> > > > > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > > > > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > > > > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > > > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > > > > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> > > > >
> > > > > On C:
> > > > > =====
> > > > > [root@node03 net]# more mpls_*
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_in
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > 0x40004000 0/0/0 gen 16 0 1 POP PEEK
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_labelspace
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > eth1    0       9
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_out
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth1,10.0.1.20)
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > mpls_tunnel
> > > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > > [root@node03 net]# ip2 route
> > > > > 10.0.0.10 via 10.0.1.20 dev eth1 lsp 0x3
> > > > > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > > > > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > > > > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > > > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > > > > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Suggested changes inline:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 10.0.0.10 (eth0)	10.0.1.20 (eth1)
> > > > > > > A---------------------B---------------------C
> > > > > > > 	10.0.0.20 (eth0)	10.0.1.30 (eth1)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On A:
> > > > > > > =====
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key1>
> > > > > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > > > > >                                                10.0.0.20?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ip2 route add 10.0.1.30/32 via 10.0.0.20 lsp <key1>
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On B:
> > > > > > > =====
> > > > > > > # for LSP from A to C
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key2>
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:16:0 -o <key2> -B
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > # for LSP from C to A
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key3>
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:20:0 -o <key3> -B
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On C:
> > > > > > > =====
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key4>
> > > > > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > > > > >                                                10.0.1.20?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > ip2 route add 10.0.0.10/32 via 10.0.1.20 lsp <key4>
> > > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Check my suggested changes.  If it still doesn't work, send the contents
> > > > > > of /proc/net/mpls_*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jim
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > James R. Leu
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > James R. Leu
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > James R. Leu
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > In remembrance
> > www.osdn.com/911/
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpls-linux-general mailing list
> > mpl...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
> >

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] trouble setting up LSPs

[Wayne W. S. <ww...@ho...>]

I am using v1.17.  I downloaded it from sourceforge 2 days ago.


On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:

> You probably answered this for me already but what version are you using?
> I thought I had this fixed.
>
> Jim
>
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 12:55:17PM -0400, Wayne W. Szeto wrote:
> >
> > Ok that fixes the ping problem, thank you.  Now I am able to ping C from A
> > and vice versa.  However I notice that I can not ftp files > 1Mb along
> > the estalished LSP (from A to C or C to A).  Of course ftp works fine
> > between A and B, and B and C.  Any ideas on whats wrong?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> >
> > > See comments inline:
> > >
> > >
> > > > mpls_out
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > 0x00000005 55/4620/0 3 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth0,10.0.0.20)
> > >              ^^^^^^^
> > >              means traffic was sent on this outlabel
> > >
> > > > 10.0.1.30 via 10.0.0.20 dev eth0 lsp 0x5
> > >                                        ^^^
> > >                                        looks right
> > >
> > > > mpls_in
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > 0x40004000 55/4840/0 gen 16 0 56 POP PEEK
> > >              ^^^^^^^                   ^^^^
> > >              means we recv traffic     No no, you want this to say FWD ...
> > >
> > > mplsadm2 -I gen:16:0 -O 0x2 -B
> > >
> > > will XC gen:16:0 to outlabel with index 0x2
> > >
> > > Start with that fix.
> > >
> > > Jim
> > >
> > >
> > > > 0x40005000 0/0/0 gen 20 0 1 POP PEEK
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_labelspace
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > eth0    0       9
> > > > eth1    0       8
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_out
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > 0x00000002 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth1,10.0.1.30)
> > > > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth0,10.0.0.10)
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_tunnel
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > [root@node02 net]# ip2 route
> > > > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > > > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > > > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > > > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> > > >
> > > > On C:
> > > > =====
> > > > [root@node03 net]# more mpls_*
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_in
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > 0x40004000 0/0/0 gen 16 0 1 POP PEEK
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_labelspace
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > eth1    0       9
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_out
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth1,10.0.1.20)
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > mpls_tunnel
> > > > ::::::::::::::
> > > > [root@node03 net]# ip2 route
> > > > 10.0.0.10 via 10.0.1.20 dev eth1 lsp 0x3
> > > > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > > > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > > > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > > > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Suggested changes inline:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 10.0.0.10 (eth0)	10.0.1.20 (eth1)
> > > > > > A---------------------B---------------------C
> > > > > > 	10.0.0.20 (eth0)	10.0.1.30 (eth1)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On A:
> > > > > > =====
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key1>
> > > > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > > > >                                                10.0.0.20?
> > > > >
> > > > > > ip2 route add 10.0.1.30/32 via 10.0.0.20 lsp <key1>
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On B:
> > > > > > =====
> > > > > > # for LSP from A to C
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key2>
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:16:0 -o <key2> -B
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > # for LSP from C to A
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key3>
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:20:0 -o <key3> -B
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On C:
> > > > > > =====
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key4>
> > > > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > > > >                                                10.0.1.20?
> > > > >
> > > > > > ip2 route add 10.0.0.10/32 via 10.0.1.20 lsp <key4>
> > > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > > >
> > > > > Check my suggested changes.  If it still doesn't work, send the contents
> > > > > of /proc/net/mpls_*
> > > > >
> > > > > Jim
> > > > > --
> > > > > James R. Leu
> > > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > James R. Leu
> > >
>
> --
> James R. Leu
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In remembrance
> www.osdn.com/911/
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
>

Re: [mpls-linux-general] trouble setting up LSPs

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

You probably answered this for me already but what version are you using?
I thought I had this fixed.

Jim

On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 12:55:17PM -0400, Wayne W. Szeto wrote:
> 
> Ok that fixes the ping problem, thank you.  Now I am able to ping C from A
> and vice versa.  However I notice that I can not ftp files > 1Mb along
> the estalished LSP (from A to C or C to A).  Of course ftp works fine
> between A and B, and B and C.  Any ideas on whats wrong?
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> 
> > See comments inline:
> >
> >
> > > mpls_out
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > 0x00000005 55/4620/0 3 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth0,10.0.0.20)
> >              ^^^^^^^
> >              means traffic was sent on this outlabel
> >
> > > 10.0.1.30 via 10.0.0.20 dev eth0 lsp 0x5
> >                                        ^^^
> >                                        looks right
> >
> > > mpls_in
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > 0x40004000 55/4840/0 gen 16 0 56 POP PEEK
> >              ^^^^^^^                   ^^^^
> >              means we recv traffic     No no, you want this to say FWD ...
> >
> > mplsadm2 -I gen:16:0 -O 0x2 -B
> >
> > will XC gen:16:0 to outlabel with index 0x2
> >
> > Start with that fix.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> >
> > > 0x40005000 0/0/0 gen 20 0 1 POP PEEK
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_labelspace
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > eth0    0       9
> > > eth1    0       8
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_out
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > 0x00000002 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth1,10.0.1.30)
> > > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth0,10.0.0.10)
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_tunnel
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > [root@node02 net]# ip2 route
> > > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> > >
> > > On C:
> > > =====
> > > [root@node03 net]# more mpls_*
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_in
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > 0x40004000 0/0/0 gen 16 0 1 POP PEEK
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_labelspace
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > eth1    0       9
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_out
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth1,10.0.1.20)
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > mpls_tunnel
> > > ::::::::::::::
> > > [root@node03 net]# ip2 route
> > > 10.0.0.10 via 10.0.1.20 dev eth1 lsp 0x3
> > > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> > >
> > > > Suggested changes inline:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > 10.0.0.10 (eth0)	10.0.1.20 (eth1)
> > > > > A---------------------B---------------------C
> > > > > 	10.0.0.20 (eth0)	10.0.1.30 (eth1)
> > > > >
> > > > > On A:
> > > > > =====
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key1>
> > > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > > >                                                10.0.0.20?
> > > >
> > > > > ip2 route add 10.0.1.30/32 via 10.0.0.20 lsp <key1>
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > > >
> > > > > On B:
> > > > > =====
> > > > > # for LSP from A to C
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key2>
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:16:0 -o <key2> -B
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > > >
> > > > > # for LSP from C to A
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key3>
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:20:0 -o <key3> -B
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > > >
> > > > > On C:
> > > > > =====
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key4>
> > > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > > >                                                10.0.1.20?
> > > >
> > > > > ip2 route add 10.0.0.10/32 via 10.0.1.20 lsp <key4>
> > > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > >
> > > > Check my suggested changes.  If it still doesn't work, send the contents
> > > > of /proc/net/mpls_*
> > > >
> > > > Jim
> > > > --
> > > > James R. Leu
> > > >
> >
> > --
> > James R. Leu
> >

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] packets not delivered to layer 3 (??)

[Wayne W. S. <ww...@ho...>]

You also need to setup a lsp from B to A so that the ack packets can find
their way back to A.  Section 2 of the mplsadm readme file contains an
example that construct LSPs between two hosts.


On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, [iso-8859-1] Sameer Gharat wrote:

> Hello James and all,
>
> I have set up 1.152 on two Linux boxes running kernel
> ver. 2.4.18-3. The two boxes are set up as...
>  ---------             ---------
>  |   A   |             |   B   |
>  ---------             ---------
>      |eth0                 |eth0
>      |10.3.8.198           |10.3.8.93
> -----------------------------------
>
> And the lsp was created b/w A and B using...
> On A :
> mplsadm2 -A -O -o push:gen:200:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.93
> ip2 route add 10.3.8.93 dev eth0 lsp 0x00000002
> mpls -L eth0:0
>
> On B:
> mplsadm2 -A -I gen:200:0
> mpls -L eth0:0
>
> I believe these commands are enough to create an LSP
> between A & B... or at least I hope so.
>
> Now, when I try to Ping B from A, the packets reach B,
> but it seems the packets are not delivered correctly
> up to layer 3 on B. The result is that the
> acknowledgement doesn't reach back to A and A shows
> 100% packet loss. If I try to ping A from B, then the
> ping packets reach A and come back to B (taking the
> lsp from A to B). But again, the packets aren't
> recognized by B and again ping shows 100% packet loss.
> Similar thing happens when I tried injecting packets
> using nemesis tools.
>
> Is there any problem with the way I've set up the LSP
> or is it some other problem?
>
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Sameer
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Want to sell your car? advertise on Yahoo Autos Classifieds. It's Free!!
>        visit http://in.autos.yahoo.com
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In remembrance
> www.osdn.com/911/
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
>

Re: [mpls-linux-general] trouble setting up LSPs

[Wayne W. S. <ww...@ho...>]

Ok that fixes the ping problem, thank you.  Now I am able to ping C from A
and vice versa.  However I notice that I can not ftp files > 1Mb along
the estalished LSP (from A to C or C to A).  Of course ftp works fine
between A and B, and B and C.  Any ideas on whats wrong?



On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:

> See comments inline:
>
>
> > mpls_out
> > ::::::::::::::
> > 0x00000005 55/4620/0 3 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth0,10.0.0.20)
>              ^^^^^^^
>              means traffic was sent on this outlabel
>
> > 10.0.1.30 via 10.0.0.20 dev eth0 lsp 0x5
>                                        ^^^
>                                        looks right
>
> > mpls_in
> > ::::::::::::::
> > 0x40004000 55/4840/0 gen 16 0 56 POP PEEK
>              ^^^^^^^                   ^^^^
>              means we recv traffic     No no, you want this to say FWD ...
>
> mplsadm2 -I gen:16:0 -O 0x2 -B
>
> will XC gen:16:0 to outlabel with index 0x2
>
> Start with that fix.
>
> Jim
>
>
> > 0x40005000 0/0/0 gen 20 0 1 POP PEEK
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_labelspace
> > ::::::::::::::
> > eth0    0       9
> > eth1    0       8
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_out
> > ::::::::::::::
> > 0x00000002 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 16) SET(eth1,10.0.1.30)
> > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth0,10.0.0.10)
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_tunnel
> > ::::::::::::::
> > [root@node02 net]# ip2 route
> > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> >
> > On C:
> > =====
> > [root@node03 net]# more mpls_*
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_in
> > ::::::::::::::
> > 0x40004000 0/0/0 gen 16 0 1 POP PEEK
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_labelspace
> > ::::::::::::::
> > eth1    0       9
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_out
> > ::::::::::::::
> > 0x00000003 0/0/0 1 PUSH(gen 20) SET(eth1,10.0.1.20)
> > ::::::::::::::
> > mpls_tunnel
> > ::::::::::::::
> > [root@node03 net]# ip2 route
> > 10.0.0.10 via 10.0.1.20 dev eth1 lsp 0x3
> > 10.0.0.0/24 dev eth0  scope link
> > 10.0.1.0/24 dev eth1  scope link
> > 10.1.0.0/24 dev eth2  scope link
> > 127.0.0.0/8 dev lo  scope link
> > default via 10.0.0.1 dev eth0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, James R. Leu wrote:
> >
> > > Suggested changes inline:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 10.0.0.10 (eth0)	10.0.1.20 (eth1)
> > > > A---------------------B---------------------C
> > > > 	10.0.0.20 (eth0)	10.0.1.30 (eth1)
> > > >
> > > > On A:
> > > > =====
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key1>
> > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > >                                                10.0.0.20?
> > >
> > > > ip2 route add 10.0.1.30/32 via 10.0.0.20 lsp <key1>
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > >
> > > > On B:
> > > > =====
> > > > # for LSP from A to C
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:16:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.1.30 # returns <key2>
> > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:16:0 -o <key2> -B
> > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > > >
> > > > # for LSP from C to A
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:20:0
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth0:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key3>
> > > > mplsadm2 -vI gen:20:0 -o <key3> -B
> > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth0:0
> > > >
> > > > On C:
> > > > =====
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAI gen:16:0
> > > > mplsadm2 -vAO 0 -o push:gen:20:set:eth1:ipv4:10.0.0.10 # returns <key4>
> > >                                                ^^^^^^^^^
> > >                                                10.0.1.20?
> > >
> > > > ip2 route add 10.0.0.10/32 via 10.0.1.20 lsp <key4>
> > > > mplsadm2 -vL eth1:0
> > >
> > > Check my suggested changes.  If it still doesn't work, send the contents
> > > of /proc/net/mpls_*
> > >
> > > Jim
> > > --
> > > James R. Leu
> > >
>
> --
> James R. Leu
>

Re: [mpls-linux-general] packets not delivered to layer 3 (??)

[James R. L. <jl...@mi...>]

First thing is to get mpls-linux-1.170, duplicate test
and send the contents of /proc/net/mpls* and the output
from 'ip route show'.

Jim

On Wed, Sep 11, 2002 at 06:59:26AM +0100, Sameer Gharat wrote:
> Hello James and all,
> 
> I have set up 1.152 on two Linux boxes running kernel
> ver. 2.4.18-3. The two boxes are set up as...
>  ---------             ---------
>  |   A   |             |   B   |
>  ---------             ---------
>      |eth0                 |eth0
>      |10.3.8.198           |10.3.8.93
> -----------------------------------
>          
> And the lsp was created b/w A and B using...
> On A :
> mplsadm2 -A -O -o push:gen:200:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.93
> ip2 route add 10.3.8.93 dev eth0 lsp 0x00000002
> mpls -L eth0:0
> 
> On B:
> mplsadm2 -A -I gen:200:0
> mpls -L eth0:0
> 
> I believe these commands are enough to create an LSP
> between A & B... or at least I hope so.
> 
> Now, when I try to Ping B from A, the packets reach B,
> but it seems the packets are not delivered correctly
> up to layer 3 on B. The result is that the
> acknowledgement doesn't reach back to A and A shows
> 100% packet loss. If I try to ping A from B, then the
> ping packets reach A and come back to B (taking the
> lsp from A to B). But again, the packets aren't
> recognized by B and again ping shows 100% packet loss.
> Similar thing happens when I tried injecting packets
> using nemesis tools.
> 
> Is there any problem with the way I've set up the LSP
> or is it some other problem?
> 
> Any help would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Cheers,
> Sameer
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Want to sell your car? advertise on Yahoo Autos Classifieds. It's Free!!
>        visit http://in.autos.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> In remembrance
> www.osdn.com/911/
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

[mpls-linux-general] packets not delivered to layer 3 (??)

[<sam...@ya...>]

Hello James and all,

I have set up 1.152 on two Linux boxes running kernel
ver. 2.4.18-3. The two boxes are set up as...
 ---------             ---------
 |   A   |             |   B   |
 ---------             ---------
     |eth0                 |eth0
     |10.3.8.198           |10.3.8.93
-----------------------------------
         
And the lsp was created b/w A and B using...
On A :
mplsadm2 -A -O -o push:gen:200:set:eth0:ipv4:10.3.8.93
ip2 route add 10.3.8.93 dev eth0 lsp 0x00000002
mpls -L eth0:0

On B:
mplsadm2 -A -I gen:200:0
mpls -L eth0:0

I believe these commands are enough to create an LSP
between A & B... or at least I hope so.

Now, when I try to Ping B from A, the packets reach B,
but it seems the packets are not delivered correctly
up to layer 3 on B. The result is that the
acknowledgement doesn't reach back to A and A shows
100% packet loss. If I try to ping A from B, then the
ping packets reach A and come back to B (taking the
lsp from A to B). But again, the packets aren't
recognized by B and again ping shows 100% packet loss.
Similar thing happens when I tried injecting packets
using nemesis tools.

Is there any problem with the way I've set up the LSP
or is it some other problem?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,
Sameer


________________________________________________________________________
Want to sell your car? advertise on Yahoo Autos Classifieds. It's Free!!
       visit http://in.autos.yahoo.com

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Please confirm your request to join linuxmpls

[Ajit J. <aj...@ko...>]

On 10 Sep 2002, Yahoo! Groups wrote:

> 
> Hello mpl...@li...,
> 
> We have received your request to join the linuxmpls 
> group hosted by Yahoo! Groups, a free, easy-to-use community service.
> 
> This request will expire in 21 days.
> 
> TO BECOME A MEMBER OF THE GROUP: 
> 
> 1) Go to the Yahoo! Groups site by clicking on this link:
> 
>    http://groups.yahoo.com/i?i=Su3nAyf3H_PY6Tev1yTzB6h8cZA&e=mpls-linux-general%40lists%2Esourceforge%2Enet 
> 
>   (If clicking doesn't work, "Cut" and "Paste" the line above into your 
>    Web browser's address bar.)
> 
> -OR-
> 
> 2) REPLY to this email by clicking "Reply" and then "Send"
>    in your email program
> 
> If you did not request, or do not want, a membership in the
> linuxmpls group, please accept our apologies
> and ignore this message.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Customer Care
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old
> cell phone?  Get a new here for FREE!
> https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
>