[afnog] MPLS LSP UP but no traffic

[Mark Tinka]

On Monday, October 17, 2011 03:46:54 PM ibtisam jamal wrote:

> >             We have several links, one as the primary
> >             and others as
> > 
> > secondary.The primary link is a fibre link and
> > secondary links are microwave.Something odd has been
> > happening on the primary link.It is physicaly up and
> > lsp is up but it has no traffic and the secondary
> > links do not take over because,rsvp knows that the lsp
> > is up.I am trying to find out why we have this and how
> > we can stop it from occurring again

The configuration you've provided isn't sufficient on its 
own. Could you perhaps drop configurations on your 
[interfaces], and [protocols] section?

It takes a mountain and all your dogs to get MPLS-TE right 
on a router (which is not to mean it's hard, but that a lot 
of components need to come together in harmony), so we'll 
need more information than you've given for now.

> > also what is the impact of setting ERO options such as
> > strict and loose ?

Well, expanded loose hops are typically used in Inter-Area 
TE situations. By Inter-Area, we mean that you're running 
IS-IS with multiple levels or OSPF with multiple areas.

In Inter-Area TE scenarios, the ingress routers have no 
knowledge of the "strict" hops beyond their area (the TED - 
TE Database - is retained only within a particular level or 
area by IS-IS or OSPF). This why the paths defined for the 
LSP are "loosely" specified at the ingress router.

Otherwise, you would use a strict ERO provided your routers 
are all in the same IS-IS level or OSPF area.

PS: note that unlike on Cisco routers, you cannot disable
    CSPF in Junos if you want to support expanded loose
    hops.

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://afnog.org/pipermail/afnog/attachments/20111017/8bba151a/attachment.pgp>