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

[mpls-linux-general] (no subject)

[farahmand z. <z_c...@ya...>]

Hi Jim,

Thank you for your response,but I don't underestand what do you mean by do a allmulti,it's not a command!, how can I know that multicast is enabled on the interface?

Thanks for your attention.do you have any other suggestion for this matter?

I really need to solve this problem.

Best regards,

Zahra.



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness

[mpls-linux-general] ldp_portable(urgent)

[farahmand z. <z_c...@ya...>]

Hi all,

i tried a below combination:
 
 ------- eth0            eth0  ---------
 :  1  :-----------------------:    2    :
 ------- 3.175       2.207   --------
 
 all ip 192.168.* 
 on node 1:

ifconfig eth0 192.168.3.175 netmask 255.255.255.0 up

ip addr add 192.168.3.175/32 dev eth0

ip route add 192.168.2.207/32 dev eth0

./mplsadm -L eth0:0

./mplsadm -d
./ldp_linux
prompt>add global 10.129.152.10
prompt>add interface eth0
prompt>add route 192.168.2.207 dev eth0

and I repeated these steps in node 2,but when I set trace, only HELLO message is observed and no other messages are found.and when I do "show session",the response is "no session is established".

I dont know what is wrong, 

Thanks for your help.

Best regards, Zahra




---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more

[mpls-linux-general] [PATCH] ldp-portable

[Yon U. <hav...@gm...>]

Hi,

 this is a raw (unlinted, unindented, it will eat your boot sector) diff of
my ldp-portable tree vs cvs (i hope).

lib:
 * be quiet, remove prints.
 * exit decode loop on error, it will endlessly loop otherwise. (i tested
    ldp-portable against the indian (bangalore) ldp stuff, it would endlessly
    loop (they are using some private definition of ldp, apparently).
 * assorted random patches I've forgotten what they were about (mostly to
    avoid asserts and NULLs for some particular states I've encountered and
    I couldnt explain)

zebra-port:
 * the start of 2 snmp implementations, one of my own, the other an ugly hacked
     version of smidumps version (now that they are cleaning the mpls mib
     mess and smidump can swallow all of them, btw the OIDS havent been
     assigned yet, I use transmission.188.646 for the start of the ldp mib).
     They dont quite work, but I think there were some ppl interested
     in doing snmp development, this might be helpful.
 * make depend
 * outdated README
 * GPL boiler plate & (c)s , jim is missing from some (C).
 * changed the memory allocation to use differentiated names, so leaks are
    easier to pinpoint. (mostly bgp names)(not that I'm debugging that yet)
 * zebra will send funny routes when it doesnt manage to instatiate the
     route in the kernel FIB, avoid dying.
 * it compiles with an april zebra cvs version
 * interface startup doesnt have a 3 second hold time anymore
 * "show ldp bindings" can filter by binding type (usually only map_(recv|sent)
    are of any interest (and present at all longer than 1 second, AFAIK))
 * configure per interface hello/keepalive hold/interval timers commands
 * configure per interface distribution mode (aka "make me core dump")
 * commands to configure resources, paths and tunnels. Nothing useful. I
    implemented the following: When the egress/32 for a tunnel (show mpls ldp
    egress) gets mapped and installed an interface is brought up and bound
    to that label. That interface follows the label should it ever change.
    If you want routes to follow that interface just add routes in zebra (ip
    route bgp-nexthop/32 tunnel_44t0). Handle with care. Do not loop
    your route recursion.

 The zebra port is still for the old kernel interface, I'm waiting for Jorge
Boncompte <jo...@dt...> to release his port to the new world order kernel
interface, I hope to integrate both making it a -D option (before september,
I hope).

 BTW, why do have mpls tunnel interface have an mtu of underlying interface
minus 4 bytes? We are sending oversized labeled packets over the hw interface,
why backoff now? IMHO label stacking is not a reason, as it applies to the
non-interface case, too. Jim?

regards
 yon

[mpls-linux-general] questions

[Yon U. <hav...@gm...>]

Hi Jim,

 allow me to dump some random things out off my head on you.

 In past you said you were developing a hacked version of zebra to support
mpls. Have you done anything on that? (appart from your day job and vrf work,
are you on speed or what? ;-)

 I had some thoughts on that which I'm rescueing from mental swap now. I even
started to write some code, but it wasnt much, like 100 lines or so. Nothing
usefull.

 I guess 1st it is just a matter of writing lsr-portable, implementing
the lsr mib just like you did implement the ldp mib in ldp-portable's *.h.
This might allow reusing the impl.h from ldp-portable.

 There 2 approaches I can think of:
1) integrate lsr-portable into zebra
2) write another daemon (zebra beastie) just like ipinfusion did (maybe just
     to avoid the GPL of zebra?)

 Approach 1 seems the easiest. It will need expanding the zebra protocol,
but not as much. It will need routing tables a la juniper's inet.X (and
mpls.X, IIRC) (I did implement something alike in the last zebra port release).
And it avoids extra interdaemon chat (and latency).

 Approach 2 might seem interesting to distribute the load (not that I would
expect much load (wrt to say a celeron 700Mhz)).

 Label requests would have to be routed over the zebra protocol anyway, and
probably in a synchronous way (which cant be assured in the actual zebra
implementation), at least ldp-portable needs synchrounous label requests.
A solution would be to simulate this by requesting blocks (ranges) of labels
from lsr-portable (over the zebra protocol) at startup time, requesting
another range on a high water mark to avoid exhaustion. Another solution
could be to open a separate (synchronous, only 1 req outstanding, no
unrequested messages) channel for label requests (and other sync. messages).
IIRC, Juniper uses static label range allocations to the different protocols,
and is thus open to exhaustion. Maybe this is no longer the case, havent
read a juniper-mpls doc in a while.

 Routes sent over to zebra would need to have at least an optional label
appended and optionally things like 2547 RD/RT/random bytes if you want
to have a single zebra instance on a host, instead of many vrf-vound
(man chvrf(1)) instances.

 martini support in ldp-portable. Have you done anything? Do you have any
(3rd party) patches?

 cr-ldp: you (and her) said venisa cabrilla had some (beta) code, but it
wasnt quite working. Anything new?

 I think it would be nice to have an overloaded release, with all the patches
thrown in. Not unlike -RELEASE, -STABLE, -ENGINEERING in some other projects.
Maybe -BLOATED_WILL_CORE_DUMP? What do you think?

 I havent checked the sourceforge patch list in a while, now I realize, will
check it out.

 PHP, Label 3: would it be usefull/easy, to modify the kernel to interpret
label 3 as what it is? This would avoid special case handling in ldp-portable.
Or having to use label instructions, AFAIK.

 How can I get the NHLFE nexthop (the ip address) in the /proc files? I would
like to see it, but I can only get it with netlink/ioctl (if at all)?

regards
 yon

Re: [mpls-linux-general] tcpdump bug?

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

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 11:06:30PM +0200, Daniel Gregorio Catalan wrote:
> Hi, now I'm making a network with 6 MPLS-Linux routers and I have made two
> different LSPs with 'mplsadm'. The net is working properly, and the routes
> are ok. I make ping from one LER to the other LER, in order to have
> different destinations to test the different LSPs and ping works properly.
> 
> And I am capturing the packets with Ethereal (tcpdump) and, in one LSP, the
> packets in one and other way (ping request and reply) are MPLS, BUT in the
> other LSP, seems that the packets are not MPLS they are all normal IP
> packets.
> 
> In the LSP that packets are showed as MPLS packets, I can see the 'famous'
> tcpdump-MPLS-Linux bug in the received packets (when I run Ethereal in the
> LER).
> However in the other LSP appear the bogus IP packets that receives the LER,
> too, but the sendings are not MPLS and I don't know if it is because of the
> bug or other problem.

Are you sure they are going via IP?  Turn off IP forwarding on one of the
LSRs (echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward).

On your LERs, what FECs are you binding to the LSPs?  What are the IPs on
the outgoing interfaces?

> Other question, can someone tell me how MPLS fragments the packets in a MPLS
> Tunnel, when because of the size of the label stack (there are too many
> labels), the packet's size exceeds the MTU?. I guess that there will be
> something that does it but I don't know how MPLS does because in an MPLS
> network the LSRs are working as switches so they can't fragment packets (Is
> this correct or I am wrong?)

MPLS doesn't fragment, it needs to present a minimized MTU to the IPv4 layer.
If the resulting packet is bigger then the outgoing interface it should be
dropped (this isn't in mpls-linux yet).

Jim

> 
> Thanks,Dani.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

[mpls-linux-general] tcpdump bug?

[Daniel G. C. <da...@on...>]

Hi, now I'm making a network with 6 MPLS-Linux routers and I have made two
different LSPs with 'mplsadm'. The net is working properly, and the routes
are ok. I make ping from one LER to the other LER, in order to have
different destinations to test the different LSPs and ping works properly.

And I am capturing the packets with Ethereal (tcpdump) and, in one LSP, the
packets in one and other way (ping request and reply) are MPLS, BUT in the
other LSP, seems that the packets are not MPLS they are all normal IP
packets.

In the LSP that packets are showed as MPLS packets, I can see the 'famous'
tcpdump-MPLS-Linux bug in the received packets (when I run Ethereal in the
LER).
However in the other LSP appear the bogus IP packets that receives the LER,
too, but the sendings are not MPLS and I don't know if it is because of the
bug or other problem.

The scenario is:

     -- 6 -- 4
   /         /   \
 2         /     8
   \       /     /
     -- 3 -- 7

There are connections between Realtek ethernet cards and 3Com ethernet
cards, I guess it isn't the problem because the ping arrives properly. I am
working with Linux Red Hat 7.1 with Linux-MPLS
installed over kernel 2.4.13, I connect the PCs with cross-connect cables
and I am using ethereal 0.8.19.

The MPLS and route configurations are similar in the two LSPs so I think it
isn't a routing problem, and I don't know if it is a MPLS bug or I have
failed. Can someone help me?

Other question, can someone tell me how MPLS fragments the packets in a MPLS
Tunnel, when because of the size of the label stack (there are too many
labels), the packet's size exceeds the MTU?. I guess that there will be
something that does it but I don't know how MPLS does because in an MPLS
network the LSRs are working as switches so they can't fragment packets (Is
this correct or I am wrong?)

Thanks,Dani.

Re: [mpls-linux-general] can anyone help me ? (urgent!!!)

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

On Fri, Apr 19, 2002 at 07:57:45PM +0700, venda - yuniarti wrote:
> Hi all,=20
> We are a new user of mpls-linux. We  want to implement mpls in our labora=
tory with 6 computer. We have run mpls-linux-1.0 in red hat 7.2 and kernel =
2.4.7 by following the instruction that included in mpls-linux-1.0/readme. =
Base on the instruction first we get kernel 2.4.7 then untar this kernel. A=
fter uncompressing mpls-linux-1.0 , we patch linux-mpls.diff into the kerne=
l and compile the kernel. We have done that steps successfully (we knew it =
by running !'dmesg | grep MPLS!( and we get the mpls version). The next ste=
p is enterting the directory /mpls-linux-1.0/utils then run !'make all!(, t=
hen edit the content of /etc/profile by adding :
>    export MPLSHOME=3D/usr/src/mpls-linux-1.0
>    export PATH=3D$PATH:$MPLSHOME/scripts:$MPLSHOME/utils
> then run !(make mplsadm!(.=20
> The topology that we use is like this :
>=20
> Host A ----- LER A ------ LSR ------ LER B ----- Host B
>    Eth0   eth0  eth1   eth2 eth0   eth0  eth1   eth0
>=20
> The ip number that we use :
> Host A =043 eth0 : 192.167.1.1
> LER A =043 eth0 : 192.167.1.2
> 	     eth1 : 192.167.2.2
> LSR  =043    eth2 : 192.167.2.3
> 	     eth0 : 192.167.3.3
> LER B =043 eth0 : 192.167.3.4
>   	     eth1 : 192.167.4.4
> Host B =043 eth0 : 192.167.4.5
>=20
> Host A and host B -=043 without MPLS=20
>=20
> LER A :
> root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
> root# mplsadm !Vv -A !VB !VO gen:1234:eth1:ipv4:192.167.2.3 !Vf  192.167.=
4.5/32
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:4563:0
> mpls_in: 40474c00 0/0/0 gen 4563 0 POP PEEK
> mpls_out: 40134803 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 1234) SET (eth1, 192.167.2.3)
>=20
> LSR:
> root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:1234:0 !VO gen:2341:eth0:ipv4:192.167.3.4 !=
VB
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:3456:0 !VO gen:4563:eth2:ipv4:192.167.2.2 !=
VB
> mpls_in : 40134800 0/0/0 gen 1234 0 POP FW (40249402)
>     40360000 0/0/0 gen 3456 0 POP FW (40474c04)
> mpls_out: 40249402 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 2341) SET (eth0, 192.167.3.4)
>     40474c04 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 4563) SET (eth2, 192.167.2.2)
>=20
> LER A :
> root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
> root# mplsadm !Vv -A !VB !VO gen:3456:eth0:ipv4:192.167.3.3 !Vf  192.167.=
1.1/32
> root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:2341:0
> mpls_in: 40249400 0/0/0 gen 2341 0 POP PEEK
> mpls_out: 40360002 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 3456) SET (eth0, 192.167.3.3)
>=20
> but when we ping host A from host B and also the opposite (host B from ho=
st A) we get the same output with the ordinary tcp/ip (ping host A from hos=
t B by using linux without mpls). We mean, if we use mpls to ping host A fr=
om host B it need =04b 1.485 ms and it is the same time that we need to pin=
g host A from host B without mpls.=20
> So we want to ask is there any mistake with all the things that we!&ve do=
ne ? because it looks like that our mpls is not running well. and what shou=
ld we do with ldp-portable ? (we have download it, but we don't know how to=
 use it to support mpls)
> So can someone tell us how to fix it ? and how we will know that the mpls=
 have run properly ? we waiting for your suggestion , thank you.
> venda, andy, amiek.

You won;t necessarily see a change in your ping times.  You shoud go to
LSR A or B and do a tcpdump (or ethereal) on on of those interface to
what is happening.

In addition turn on mpls kernel debugging (mplsadm -d) and look at your
console output (also in /var/log/messages)

Jim

>=20
>=20
>=20
> Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail acc=
ount at http://www.eudoramail.com
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

--=20
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] Patch 2.4.17-1.128.diff and LDP - does it works ?

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

ldp-portable hasn't been updated to run on mpls-linux-1.1xx yet.

On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 09:24:27AM -0400, eli...@ne... wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I didn't manage to compile ldp_portable (from CVS).
> I added -I/usr/src/linux/include/ -DMPLS_LINUX and removed -Werror from the CFLAGS.
> 
> Also I see that some definitions are missing from /usr/src/linux/include/linux/rtnetlink.h so I add the following
> line I found in patch linux-2.4.16-1.108.diff
> 
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MPLS
> +
> +#define    RTM_NEWNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+32)
> +#define    RTM_DELNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+33)
> +#define    RTM_GETNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+34)
> +
> +#define    RTM_NEWILM  (RTM_BASE+36)
> +#define    RTM_DELILM  (RTM_BASE+37)
> +#define    RTM_GETILM  (RTM_BASE+38)
> +
> +#define    RTM_NEWXC   (RTM_BASE+40)
> +#define    RTM_DELXC   (RTM_BASE+41)
> +#define    RTM_GETXC   (RTM_BASE+42)
> +
> +#define    RTM_NEWFTN  (RTM_BASE+44)
> +#define    RTM_DELFTN  (RTM_BASE+45)
> +#define    RTM_GETFTN  (RTM_BASE+46)
> +
> +#define    RTM_SETOUTINSTR (RTM_BASE+48)
> +#define    RTM_GETOUTINSTR (RTM_BASE+49)
> +#define    RTM_SETININSTR  (RTM_BASE+50)
> +#define    RTM_GETININSTR  (RTM_BASE+51)
> +
> +#define    RTM_NEWL2CC (RTM_BASE+52)
> +#define    RTM_DELL2CC (RTM_BASE+53)
> +#define    RTM_GETL2CC (RTM_BASE+54)
> +
> +#define    RTM_MAX     (RTM_BASE+55)
> +
> +#else
> +
>  #define    RTM_MAX     (RTM_BASE+31)
> +
> +#endif
>  
> 
> I am still getting other errors, I probably doing something wrong.
> Please help.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> Eli
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________________________
> Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/
> 
> Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

-- 
James R. Leu

Re: RE: [mpls-linux-general] MPLS packets

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

On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 11:35:41AM +0200, SJ...@te... wrote:
>=20
> Thanks for the info,
>=20
> no i have a new doubt, if no info is overwritten in the original ip
> packet, all the info is added so the packet will be a little bigger tha=
n
> a normal one, wont be ???

Yes you are correct.  Each hop needs to take this into consideration.

> Has anyone succesfuly apllied the mpls patch to 2.4.18 kernel ????? or
> anyone after 2.4.9 version ???

Try 2.4.12

Jim

> ----- Mensaje Original -----
> De: eli...@ne...
> Fecha: S=E1bado, Abril 20, 2002 9:36 am
> Asunto: RE: [mpls-linux-general] MPLS packets
>=20
> > MPLS info (labels) is stored between layer2 and layer3, If you look=20
> > at IP packet when the underline layer2 is ethernet, you should see=20
> > it between the eth-eader and IP-header.=20
> >=20
> > Hope it help.
> >=20
> > Eli.
> >=20
> > sj...@te... wrote:
> >=20
> > >
> > >Hi all,
> > >
> > >can anyone tell me wheres is exaclty stored the mpls info on the=20
> > tcp packet ?????
> > >Or any link where i can take a look ???
> > >
> > >TIA
> > >
> > >Javier Sanchez Llera
> > >sj...@te...
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________
> > >mpls-linux-general mailing list
> > >mpl...@li...
> > >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
> > >
> >=20
> >=20
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas.=20
> > Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape!=20
> > http://shopnow.netscape.com/
> > Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at=20
> > http://webmail.netscape.com/
> >=20
>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> mpls-linux-general mailing list
> mpl...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general

--=20
James R. Leu

Re: [mpls-linux-general] question

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

On Sat, Apr 20, 2002 at 10:09:59PM +0900, =C0=D3=C7=FC=C5=C3 wrote:
> hi all
> please , tell me  about configuration to verify the ldp_portable's oper=
ation=20
>=20
> thanks.. bye.

Look in ldp-portable/linux-port/README.cli

Jim
--=20
James R. Leu

RE: Re: [mpls-linux-general] Patch 2.4.17-1.128.diff and LDP - does it works ?

[<eli...@ne...>]

Hi,

Already done this.
Does LDP works on your linux, if yes I will be glad if you tell me
which mpls-patch and ldp you used.

Thanks
Eli

"anish  verma" <ani...@re...> wrote:

>hi,
>  have u applied the mpls patch..
>if yes make sure that
>-I /us/src/linux/include points to the kernel to which u have 
>applied the mpls patch.
>hope this will help
>anish
>On Sat, 20 Apr 2002 eli...@ne... wrote :
>>Hi,
>>
>>I didn't manage to compile ldp_portable (from CVS).
>>I added -I/usr/src/linux/include/ -DMPLS_LINUX and removed 
>>-Werror from the CFLAGS.
>>
>>Also I see that some definitions are missing from 
>>/usr/src/linux/include/linux/rtnetlink.h so I add the following
>>line I found in patch linux-2.4.16-1.108.diff
>>
>>+#ifdef CONFIG_MPLS
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_NEWNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+32)
>>+#define    RTM_DELNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+33)
>>+#define    RTM_GETNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+34)
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_NEWILM  (RTM_BASE+36)
>>+#define    RTM_DELILM  (RTM_BASE+37)
>>+#define    RTM_GETILM  (RTM_BASE+38)
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_NEWXC   (RTM_BASE+40)
>>+#define    RTM_DELXC   (RTM_BASE+41)
>>+#define    RTM_GETXC   (RTM_BASE+42)
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_NEWFTN  (RTM_BASE+44)
>>+#define    RTM_DELFTN  (RTM_BASE+45)
>>+#define    RTM_GETFTN  (RTM_BASE+46)
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_SETOUTINSTR (RTM_BASE+48)
>>+#define    RTM_GETOUTINSTR (RTM_BASE+49)
>>+#define    RTM_SETININSTR  (RTM_BASE+50)
>>+#define    RTM_GETININSTR  (RTM_BASE+51)
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_NEWL2CC (RTM_BASE+52)
>>+#define    RTM_DELL2CC (RTM_BASE+53)
>>+#define    RTM_GETL2CC (RTM_BASE+54)
>>+
>>+#define    RTM_MAX     (RTM_BASE+55)
>>+
>>+#else
>>+
>>  #define    RTM_MAX     (RTM_BASE+31)
>>+
>>+#endif
>>
>>
>>I am still getting other errors, I probably doing something 
>>wrong.
>>Please help.
>>
>>Thanks in advance
>>Eli
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>__________________________________________________________________
>>Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift 
>>ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with 
>>Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/
>>
>>Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at 
>>http://webmail.netscape.com/
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>mpls-linux-general mailing list
>>mpl...@li...
>>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
>
>_________________________________________________________
>Click below to visit monsterindia.com and review jobs in India or 
>Abroad
>http://monsterindia.rediff.com/jobs
>
>


__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

[mpls-linux-general] Patch 2.4.17-1.128.diff and LDP - does it works ?

[<eli...@ne...>]

Hi,

I didn't manage to compile ldp_portable (from CVS).
I added -I/usr/src/linux/include/ -DMPLS_LINUX and removed -Werror from the CFLAGS.

Also I see that some definitions are missing from /usr/src/linux/include/linux/rtnetlink.h so I add the following
line I found in patch linux-2.4.16-1.108.diff

+#ifdef CONFIG_MPLS
+
+#define    RTM_NEWNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+32)
+#define    RTM_DELNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+33)
+#define    RTM_GETNHLFE    (RTM_BASE+34)
+
+#define    RTM_NEWILM  (RTM_BASE+36)
+#define    RTM_DELILM  (RTM_BASE+37)
+#define    RTM_GETILM  (RTM_BASE+38)
+
+#define    RTM_NEWXC   (RTM_BASE+40)
+#define    RTM_DELXC   (RTM_BASE+41)
+#define    RTM_GETXC   (RTM_BASE+42)
+
+#define    RTM_NEWFTN  (RTM_BASE+44)
+#define    RTM_DELFTN  (RTM_BASE+45)
+#define    RTM_GETFTN  (RTM_BASE+46)
+
+#define    RTM_SETOUTINSTR (RTM_BASE+48)
+#define    RTM_GETOUTINSTR (RTM_BASE+49)
+#define    RTM_SETININSTR  (RTM_BASE+50)
+#define    RTM_GETININSTR  (RTM_BASE+51)
+
+#define    RTM_NEWL2CC (RTM_BASE+52)
+#define    RTM_DELL2CC (RTM_BASE+53)
+#define    RTM_GETL2CC (RTM_BASE+54)
+
+#define    RTM_MAX     (RTM_BASE+55)
+
+#else
+
 #define    RTM_MAX     (RTM_BASE+31)
+
+#endif
 

I am still getting other errors, I probably doing something wrong.
Please help.

Thanks in advance
Eli





__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

[mpls-linux-general] question

[<ht...@ce...>]

aGkgYWxsDQpwbGVhc2UgLCB0ZWxsIG1lICBhYm91dCBjb25maWd1cmF0aW9uIHRvIHZlcmlmeSB0
aGUgbGRwX3BvcnRhYmxlJ3Mgb3BlcmF0aW9uIA0KDQp0aGFua3MuLiBieWUuDQo=

Re: RE: [mpls-linux-general] MPLS packets

[<SJ...@te...>]

Thanks for the info=2C

no i have a new doubt=2C if no info is overwritten in the original ip
packet=2C all the info is added so the packet will be a little bigger tha=
n
a normal one=2C wont be =3F=3F=3F

Has anyone succesfuly apllied the mpls patch to 2=2E4=2E18 kernel =3F=3F=3F=
=3F=3F or
anyone after 2=2E4=2E9 version =3F=3F=3F



Javier Sanchez Llera
sjllera=40telefonica=2Enet



----- Mensaje Original -----
De=3A elihadad2=40netscape=2Enet
Fecha=3A S=E1bado=2C Abril 20=2C 2002 9=3A36 am
Asunto=3A RE=3A =5Bmpls-linux-general=5D MPLS packets

=3E MPLS info (labels) is stored between layer2 and layer3=2C If you look=
 =

=3E at IP packet when the underline layer2 is ethernet=2C you should see =

=3E it between the eth-eader and IP-header=2E =

=3E =

=3E Hope it help=2E
=3E =

=3E Eli=2E
=3E =

=3E sjllera=40telefonica=2Enet wrote=3A
=3E =

=3E =3E
=3E =3EHi all=2C
=3E =3E
=3E =3Ecan anyone tell me wheres is exaclty stored the mpls info on the =

=3E tcp packet =3F=3F=3F=3F=3F
=3E =3EOr any link where i can take a look =3F=3F=3F
=3E =3E
=3E =3ETIA
=3E =3E
=3E =3EJavier Sanchez Llera
=3E =3Esjllera=40telefonica=2Enet
=3E =3E
=3E =3E
=3E =3E
=3E =3E
=3E =3E=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=

=3E =3Empls-linux-general mailing list
=3E =3Empls-linux-general=40lists=2Esourceforge=2Enet
=3E =3Ehttps=3A//lists=2Esourceforge=2Enet/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-gene=
ral
=3E =3E
=3E =

=3E =

=3E =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=
=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
=3E Your favorite stores=2C helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas=2E=
 =

=3E Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop=40Netscape! =

=3E http=3A//shopnow=2Enetscape=2Ecom/
=3E Get your own FREE=2C personal Netscape Mail account today at =

=3E http=3A//webmail=2Enetscape=2Ecom/
=3E 

[mpls-linux-general] guestion

[<ht...@ce...>]
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RE: [mpls-linux-general] MPLS packets

[<eli...@ne...>]

MPLS info (labels) is stored between layer2 and layer3, If you look at IP packet when the underline layer2 is ethernet, you should see it between the eth-eader and IP-header. 

Hope it help.

Eli.

sj...@te... wrote:

>
>Hi all,
>
>can anyone tell me wheres is exaclty stored the mpls info on the tcp packet ?????
>Or any link where i can take a look ???
>
>TIA
>
>Javier Sanchez Llera
>sj...@te...
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>mpls-linux-general mailing list
>mpl...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mpls-linux-general
>


__________________________________________________________________
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/

Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

[mpls-linux-general] can anyone help me ? (urgent!!!)

[venda - y. <vy...@eu...>]

Hi all, 
We are a new user of mpls-linux. We  want to implement mpls in our laboratory with 6 computer. We have run mpls-linux-1.0 in red hat 7.2 and kernel 2.4.7 by following the instruction that included in mpls-linux-1.0/readme. Base on the instruction first we get kernel 2.4.7 then untar this kernel. After uncompressing mpls-linux-1.0 , we patch linux-mpls.diff into the kernel and compile the kernel. We have done that steps successfully (we knew it by running !'dmesg | grep MPLS!( and we get the mpls version). The next step is enterting the directory /mpls-linux-1.0/utils then run !'make all!(, then edit the content of /etc/profile by adding :
   export MPLSHOME=/usr/src/mpls-linux-1.0
   export PATH=$PATH:$MPLSHOME/scripts:$MPLSHOME/utils
then run !(make mplsadm!(. 
The topology that we use is like this :

Host A ----- LER A ------ LSR ------ LER B ----- Host B
   Eth0   eth0  eth1   eth2 eth0   eth0  eth1   eth0

The ip number that we use :
Host A 3 eth0 : 192.167.1.1
LER A 3 eth0 : 192.167.1.2
	     eth1 : 192.167.2.2
LSR  3    eth2 : 192.167.2.3
	     eth0 : 192.167.3.3
LER B 3 eth0 : 192.167.3.4
  	     eth1 : 192.167.4.4
Host B 3 eth0 : 192.167.4.5

Host A and host B -3 without MPLS 

LER A :
root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
root# mplsadm !Vv -A !VB !VO gen:1234:eth1:ipv4:192.167.2.3 !Vf  192.167.4.5/32
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:4563:0
mpls_in: 40474c00 0/0/0 gen 4563 0 POP PEEK
mpls_out: 40134803 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 1234) SET (eth1, 192.167.2.3)

LSR:
root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:1234:0 !VO gen:2341:eth0:ipv4:192.167.3.4 !VB
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:3456:0 !VO gen:4563:eth2:ipv4:192.167.2.2 !VB
mpls_in : 40134800 0/0/0 gen 1234 0 POP FW (40249402)
    40360000 0/0/0 gen 3456 0 POP FW (40474c04)
mpls_out: 40249402 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 2341) SET (eth0, 192.167.3.4)
    40474c04 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 4563) SET (eth2, 192.167.2.2)

LER A :
root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
root# mplsadm !Vv -A !VB !VO gen:3456:eth0:ipv4:192.167.3.3 !Vf  192.167.1.1/32
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:2341:0
mpls_in: 40249400 0/0/0 gen 2341 0 POP PEEK
mpls_out: 40360002 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 3456) SET (eth0, 192.167.3.3)

but when we ping host A from host B and also the opposite (host B from host A) we get the same output with the ordinary tcp/ip (ping host A from host B by using linux without mpls). We mean, if we use mpls to ping host A from host B it need b 1.485 ms and it is the same time that we need to ping host A from host B without mpls. 
So we want to ask is there any mistake with all the things that we!&ve done ? because it looks like that our mpls is not running well. and what should we do with ldp-portable ? (we have download it, but we don't know how to use it to support mpls)
So can someone tell us how to fix it ? and how we will know that the mpls have run properly ? we waiting for your suggestion , thank you.
venda, andy, amiek.



Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com

[mpls-linux-general] can anyone help me ? (urgent!!!)

[venda - y. <vy...@eu...>]

Hi all, 
We are a new user of mpls-linux. We  want to implement mpls in our laboratory with 6 computer. We have run mpls-linux-1.0 in red hat 7.2 and kernel 2.4.7 by following the instruction that included in mpls-linux-1.0/readme. Base on the instruction first we get kernel 2.4.7 then untar this kernel. After uncompressing mpls-linux-1.0 , we patch linux-mpls.diff into the kernel and compile the kernel. We have done that steps successfully (we knew it by running !'dmesg | grep MPLS!( and we get the mpls version). The next step is enterting the directory /mpls-linux-1.0/utils then run !'make all!(, then edit the content of /etc/profile by adding :
   export MPLSHOME=/usr/src/mpls-linux-1.0
   export PATH=$PATH:$MPLSHOME/scripts:$MPLSHOME/utils
then run !(make mplsadm!(. 
The topology that we use is like this :

Host A ----- LER A ------ LSR ------ LER B ----- Host B
   Eth0   eth0  eth1   eth2 eth0   eth0  eth1   eth0

The ip number that we use :
Host A 3 eth0 : 192.167.1.1
LER A 3 eth0 : 192.167.1.2
	     eth1 : 192.167.2.2
LSR  3    eth2 : 192.167.2.3
	     eth0 : 192.167.3.3
LER B 3 eth0 : 192.167.3.4
  	     eth1 : 192.167.4.4
Host B 3 eth0 : 192.167.4.5

Host A and host B -3 without MPLS 

LER A :
root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
root# mplsadm !Vv -A !VB !VO gen:1234:eth1:ipv4:192.167.2.3 !Vf  192.167.4.5/32
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:4563:0
mpls_in: 40474c00 0/0/0 gen 4563 0 POP PEEK
mpls_out: 40134803 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 1234) SET (eth1, 192.167.2.3)

LSR:
root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:1234:0 !VO gen:2341:eth0:ipv4:192.167.3.4 !VB
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:3456:0 !VO gen:4563:eth2:ipv4:192.167.2.2 !VB
mpls_in : 40134800 0/0/0 gen 1234 0 POP FW (40249402)
    40360000 0/0/0 gen 3456 0 POP FW (40474c04)
mpls_out: 40249402 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 2341) SET (eth0, 192.167.3.4)
    40474c04 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 4563) SET (eth2, 192.167.2.2)

LER A :
root# mplsadm -v !VL eth0:0
root# mplsadm !Vv !VL eth1:0
root# mplsadm !Vv -A !VB !VO gen:3456:eth0:ipv4:192.167.3.3 !Vf  192.167.1.1/32
root# mplsadm !Vv !VA !VI gen:2341:0
mpls_in: 40249400 0/0/0 gen 2341 0 POP PEEK
mpls_out: 40360002 0/0/0 PUSH (gen 3456) SET (eth0, 192.167.3.3)

but when we ping host A from host B and also the opposite (host B from host A) we get the same output with the ordinary tcp/ip (ping host A from host B by using linux without mpls). We mean, if we use mpls to ping host A from host B it need b 1.485 ms and it is the same time that we need to ping host A from host B without mpls. 
So we want to ask is there any mistake with all the things that we!&ve done ? because it looks like that our mpls is not running well. and what should we do with ldp-portable ? (we have download it, but we don't know how to use it to support mpls)
So can someone tell us how to fix it ? and how we will know that the mpls have run properly ? we waiting for your suggestion , thank you.
venda, andy, amiek.



Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com

[mpls-linux-general] MPLS packets

[<sj...@te...>]

Hi all,

can anyone tell me wheres is exaclty stored the mpls info on the tcp packet ?????
Or any link where i can take a look ???

TIA

Javier Sanchez Llera
sj...@te...

Re: [mpls-linux-general] the source to ldp-portable

[Abhijit G. <gab...@ee...>]
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[mpls-linux-general] LDP label space

[Vardhan_Walavalkar <Var...@Sa...>]

Hi,
 Ldp portable code currently does not allow multiple labels for an
interface. Why?
The current label assignment is done in terms of the label space for each 
interface. However how is this assigned in the first place. Also how is LSP
merging currently 
cupported in the ldp code?

thanks,
Vardhan

(Im sorry if this is not the right forum for ldp-portable questions. If not,
please inform me about the 
correct one)
************************************************************************** 
This email (including any attachments) is intended for the sole use of the
intended recipient/s and may contain material that is CONFIDENTIAL AND
PRIVATE COMPANY INFORMATION. Any review or reliance by others or copying or
distribution or forwarding of any or all of the contents in this message is
STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact
the sender by email and delete all copies; your cooperation in this regard
is appreciated.
**************************************************************************

Re: [mpls-linux-general] mplsadm(urgent)

[Kalyan T.B <phy...@ya...>]

--- farahmand zahra <z_c...@ya...> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm making a MPLS network with Linux-MPLS 1.0 over
> kernel 2.4.13 in a Red Hat Linux 7.2 system. I
> compiled mplsadm & ldp-linux succesfully,but when I
> run mplsadm, not's happen and when I type for
> example 'mplsadm -A -B -O gen:16:eth0:ipv4:B -f
> B/32' this error is ocured: 'bash:mplsadm:command
cd into the utils directory and try
./mplsadm -A -B -O gen:16:eth0:ipv4:B -f B/32
 and the B's after ipv4: should be some I.P.

> not found' .What is wrong?
> 
> Thanks for your help.
> 
> Best regards, Zahra
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

[mpls-linux-general] mplsadm(urgent)

[farahmand z. <z_c...@ya...>]

Hi all,

I'm making a MPLS network with Linux-MPLS 1.0 over kernel 2.4.13 in a Red Hat Linux 7.2 system. I compiled mplsadm & ldp-linux succesfully,but when I run mplsadm, not's happen and when I type for example 'mplsadm -A -B -O gen:16:eth0:ipv4:B -f B/32' this error is ocured: 'bash:mplsadm:command not found' .What is wrong?

Thanks for your help.

Best regards, Zahra

 



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax

Re: [mpls-linux-general] mplsadm

[Kallu M. <phy...@ya...>]

you can have a look at the files  /proc/net/mpls_*
to see whether what you were trying is reflected there
or not.


--- farahmand zahra <z_c...@ya...> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I compiled mplsadm succesfully,but I dont know how
> it works?!
> 
> in the other words, when I run it (./mplsadm) ,ther
> is no reflexion and for example a command like 
> 
> this: mplsadm -L eth0:0 is failed.
> 
> Hope somebody can help me .
> 
> With best regards.
> 
> yasi jaberi.
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

[mpls-linux-general] the source to ldp-portable

[clz <cui...@ya...>]

SGksSmltDQogICAgIEkgd2FudCB0byByZWFkIHRoZSBzb3VyY2UgdG8gbGRwLXBvcnRhYmxlIGlu
IG9yZGVyIHRvIGdldCB0aGUgZGV0YWlscy4gV291bGQgeW91IGxpa2UgdG8gdGVsbCBtZSB3aGVy
ZSBpcyB0aGUgbWFpbigpIGZ1bmN0aW9uPw0KDQpBbnkgaGVscCB3aWxsIGJlIGhpZ2hseSBhcHBy
ZWNpYXRlZC4NCkJlc3QgICAgUmVnYXJkcw0KDQpjbHoNCg0K


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com