Issue trying to deploy a new SR path on Juniper MX

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Hi, we are an ISP and we are thinking of migration from static RSVP tunnels to Segment Routing with an external controller. Our network is build mostly on Juniper MX devices, we cretead a lab with few routers and with an ODL Neon controller + Pathman-SR. Unfortunatelly we can't deploy any path. So, what we have: ODL Neon Controller Pathman-SR Juniper vMX devices running Junos 17.2R1.13

All the routers are seen in Pathman-SR, we have following topologies in our ODL controller: example-linkstate-topology(all the routers/links are seen there) example-pcep-topology(all the routers are connected to PCEP controller and session is UP, configured with Stateful, Active). example-netconf-topology(the status is connected with all the routers) I've attached a file, with the result of "/restconf/operational/network-topology:network-topology/"

When I try to deploy a path, I see the following error: "Response indicated the error in frontend-backend communication."

This the error in karaf.log: "2019-04-19T18:56:12,806 | INFO | remote-connector-processing-executor-19 | NetconfDevice | 407 - org.opendaylight.netconf.sal-netconf-connector - 1.9.0 | RemoteDevice{EQUINIX}: Netconf connector initialized successfully 2019-04-19T18:56:13,589 | WARN | epollEventLoopGroup-5-2 | Stateful07TopologySessionListener | 381 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-topology-provider - 0.11.0 | Unhandled PCErr message PcerrMessage{_errors=[Errors{_errorObject=ErrorObject{_type=6, _value=10, _ignore=false, _processingRule=false, augmentation=[]}, augmentation=[]}], augmentation=[]}. 2019-04-19T18:56:13,590 | WARN | epollEventLoopGroup-5-2 | AbstractTopologySessionListener | 381 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-topology-provider - 0.11.0 | Unhandled message Pcerr{_pcerrMessage=PcerrMessage{_errors=[Errors{_errorObject=ErrorObject{_type=6, _value=10, _ignore=false, _processingRule=false, augmentation=[]}, augmentation=[]}], augmentation=[]}, augmentation=[]} on session PCEPSessionImpl{channel=[id: 0x35c28cba, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 - R:/10.100.100.11:62749], localOpen=Open{_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=0, _tlvs=Tlvs{augmentation=[Tlvs1{_srPceCapability=SrPceCapability{_msd=0, augmentation=[]}}, Tlvs1{_stateful=Stateful{_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1{_initiation=true}, Stateful1{_deltaLspSyncCapability=true, _includeDbVersion=true, _triggeredInitialSync=true, _triggeredResync=true}]}}]}, augmentation=[]}, remoteOpen=Open{_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=49, _tlvs=Tlvs{augmentation=[Tlvs1{_srPceCapability=SrPceCapability{_msd=5, augmentation=[]}}, Tlvs1{_stateful=Stateful{_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1{_initiation=true}, Stateful1{}]}}, Tlvs3{}]}, _version=ProtocolVersion{_value=1}, _ignore=false, _processingRule=false, augmentation=[]}}"

This is the log in /tmp/pathman.log: "6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.511 UTC root:initialize INFO: Init 2 done - debug saved 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.512 UTC root:rest_interface_parser INFO: Commands Relieved: {u'path': [u'CORE0', u'EQUINIX'], u'option': u'create', u'name': u'CORE0 -> EQUINIX'} 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.512 UTC root:get_loop_list INFO: Path: [u'CORE0', u'EQUINIX'] 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.512 UTC root:get_loop_list INFO: Loop list: [u'10.100.100.20'] 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.512 UTC root:get_sid_list INFO: Path: [u'CORE0', u'EQUINIX'] 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.513 UTC root:get_sid_list INFO: SID list: [2020] 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:13.592 UTC root:createSRtunnel INFO: Create SR Tunnel response: {u'output': {u'failure': u'failed', u'error': [{u'error-object': {u'ignore': True, u'processing-rule': True, u'type': 10, u'value': 5}}]}} 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:15.595 UTC root:post INFO: {"response": [{"cause": {"failure": "failed", "error": [{"error-object": {"ignore": true, "processing-rule": true, "type": 10, "value": 5}}]}, "option": "create", "success": false}]} 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:15.665 UTC root:initialize INFO: Init 2 done - debug saved 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:15.665 UTC root:rest_interface_parser INFO: Commands Relieved: {u'option': u'list_all'} 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:15.679 UTC root:get_url INFO: Url get Status: 200 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:15.679 UTC root:listAllLsp INFO: list: [], formatted: [] 6591 2019-04-19 15:56:15.680 UTC root:post INFO: {"response": [{"list": [], "option": "list_all", "success": true}]}"

This is the error which I see on Juniper MX in the log file of PCEP controller: "Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 80, flags: 0x0 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 2 lsp_setup_type: 0 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'EQUINIX -> CORE0' Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.20, destination: 10.100.100.11 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received: Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: ...P!........... 20 0C 00 50 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: ................ 00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 1C 00 00 00 09 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: ....EQUINIX.->.C 00 11 00 10 45 51 55 49 4E 49 58 20 2D 3E 20 43 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: ORE0.....dd..dd. 4F 52 45 30 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 14 0A 64 64 0B Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: .........}...dd. 07 10 00 10 05 0C 10 01 00 7D B0 00 0A 64 64 0B Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_msg_parse: Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() --> Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x886e000 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl' Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_core_received_pccreate() --> Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'EQUINIX -> CORE0' from TLV Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() --> Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() --> Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 2 lsp_setup_type: 48 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 10, value: 5 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <-- Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <-- Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb() --> Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb(): onerror_cb pcep 0x880b060 ctx 0x882c000 error 0 (No error: 0) Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb(): Outgoing PCErr msg with TYPE:6 and VALUE:10 Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb() <-- Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 19 18:19:10 [4829] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 6, value: 10 "

Can anybody advice what to do to solve the problem ? Any help would be very appreciated!!!

operational-network-topology.txt

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Is there anybody from guru's who can help me please ? @alwye @nikmon2 @gilesheron @chrismetz09

As I understood from debug of my ODL controller, the problem seems to be in loading yang schemes/modules... I've put all the schemes/modules into "karaf-0.8.0/cache/schema/" directory, and set the name accordingly: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 7988475 Apr 23 11:05 configuration@2015-09-11.yang - for Junos 17.1R8 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10686894 Apr 23 10:49 configuration@2017-01-01.yang - for Junos 17.2R13

But when they try to load, I got this error into debug log of my controller: unsatisfied imports: {RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration]=[ModuleImportImpl [name=junos-extension, revision=null, semanticVersion=null]]} 2019-04-23T12:50:18,623 | WARN | remote-connector-processing-executor-14 | NetconfDevice | 418 - org.opendaylight.netconf.sal-netconf-connector - 1.7.0 | RemoteDevice{EQUINIX}: Unable to build schema context, failed to resolve source RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration@2017-01-01], will reattempt without it org.opendaylight.yangtools.yang.model.repo.api.SchemaResolutionException: Failed to resolve required models, failed source: RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration@2017-01-01], resolved sources: [], unsatisfied imports: {} 2019-04-23T12:28:31,378 | WARN | remote-connector-processing-executor-12 | SharedSchemaContextFactory | 337 - org.opendaylight.yangtools.yang-parser-impl - 2.0.1 | Source identifier mismatch for module "configuration", requested as RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration@2015-09-11] but actually is RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration]. Using actual id 2019-04-23T12:28:31,382 | WARN | remote-connector-processing-executor-12 | NetconfDevice | 418 - org.opendaylight.netconf.sal-netconf-connector - 1.7.0 | Unable to map identifier to a devices reported capability: RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration] Available: [(http://xml.juniper.net/xnm/1.1/xnm?revision=2015-09-11)configuration] 2019-04-23T12:28:31,382 | WARN | remote-connector-processing-executor-12 | NetconfDevice | 418 - org.opendaylight.netconf.sal-netconf-connector - 1.7.0 | RemoteDevice{NXDATA}: Unable to build schema context, unsatisfied imports {RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration]=[ModuleImportImpl [name=junos-extension, revision=null, semanticVersion=null]]}, will reattempt with resolved only org.opendaylight.yangtools.yang.model.repo.api.SchemaResolutionException: Failed to resolve required models, failed source: null, resolved sources: [], unsatisfied imports: {RevisionSourceIdentifier [name=configuration]=[ModuleImportImpl [name=junos-extension, revision=null, semanticVersion=null]]}

configuration http://yang.juniper.net/yang/1.1/jc/configuration/junos/17.2R1.13 show-auto-configuration http://yang.juniper.net/yang/1.1/jrpc/show-auto-configuration/junos/17.2R1.13

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

When I switched to Junos 17.1R8, I get another error:

cat /tmp/pathman.log 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:48.427 UTC root:rest_interface_parser INFO: Commands Relieved: {u'path': [u'NXDATA', u'CORE1'], u'option': u'create', u'name': u'NXDATA -> CORE1'} 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:48.428 UTC root:get_loop_list INFO: Path: [u'NXDATA', u'CORE1'] 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:48.428 UTC root:get_loop_list INFO: Loop list: [u'10.100.100.10'] 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:48.428 UTC root:get_sid_list INFO: Path: [u'NXDATA', u'CORE1'] 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:48.428 UTC root:get_sid_list INFO: SID list: [801010] 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:48.504 UTC root:createSRtunnel INFO: Create SR Tunnel response: {u'output': {u'failure': u'no-ack'}} 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:50.507 UTC root:post INFO: {"response": [{"cause": {"failure": "no-ack"}, "option": "create", "success": false}]} 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:50.531 UTC root:initialize INFO: Init 2 done - debug saved 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:50.531 UTC root:rest_interface_parser INFO: Commands Relieved: {u'option': u'list_all'} 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:50.546 UTC root:get_url INFO: Url get Status: 200 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:50.547 UTC root:listAllLsp INFO: list: [], formatted: [] 16126 2019-04-23 12:27:50.547 UTC root:post INFO: {"response": [{"list": [], "option": "list_all", "success": true}]}

This are the logs from Juniper vMX router: Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 80, flags: 0x0 Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb() --> Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb(): onerror_cb pcep 0x880b060 ctx 0x882d000 error 0 (No error: 0) Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb(): Outgoing PCErr msg with TYPE:2 and VALUE:0 Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb() <-- Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 2, value: 0 Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_log_cb(): pcep_obj_parse(): Invalid SRP object (length=20) Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: Incorrect message received: Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: ...P!........... 20 0C 00 50 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: ................ 00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 1C 00 00 00 09 Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: ....NXDATA.->.CO 00 11 00 0F 4E 58 44 41 54 41 20 2D 3E 20 43 4F Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: RE1......dd..dd. 52 45 31 00 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 16 0A 64 64 0A Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: .............dd. 07 10 00 10 05 0C 10 01 C3 8F 20 00 0A 64 64 0A Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pcep_msg_parse: Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_log_cb(): pcep_msg_parse(): Could not parse all objects from message Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_log_cb(): connection_readable(): Unable to parse message Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_log_cb(): close_conn(): Closing connection with state 4, err: 22, close_msg: 3 Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb() --> Apr 23 15:27:46 [4658] pccd_pcep_onerror_cb(): onerror_cb pcep 0x880b060 ctx 0x882d000 error 22 (Invalid argument)

nikmon2 commented 5 years ago

I have not looked at ODL Neon at this time so it would be a little while before I have a setup to compare with. But error messages logged in pathman's log are as received from ODL, and you can decode them by looking at PCEP error codes at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-04

Cheers, Nik

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

@nikmon2 The last logs are from ODL Nitrogen, as I thought it was a problem with ODL controller. Still no result..

If you want I can give you access to my lab with 4 vMX routers(in EVE-NG Lab) + 1 VPS with ODL Nitrogen Controller and Pathman-SR. It will be easier to reproduce the issue which I encounter and easier to help me to solve it :).

As about the errors, I tried to search in RFC about the error type and value... But still didn't understand what causes the problem, and how can I solve it.

On Tue, 23 Apr 2019, 20:21 nikmon2, notifications@github.com wrote:

I have not looked at ODL Neon at this time so it would be a little while before I have a setup to compare with. But error messages logged in pathman's log are as received from ODL, and you can decode them by looking at PCEP error codes at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-04

Cheers, Nik

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-485896497, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AL3HQPZNAYK6RWLNE7D2MIDPR5ASTANCNFSM4HHE4PDA .

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

I think that the problem is that ODL is not impoting/resolving correctly yang modules which I put into /cache/schema/ directory, and because of this Pathman can't send/retrieve correct commands to/from vMX.

What is wrong ? I've put all the yang modules from https://github.com/Juniper/yang for specific version and put it into /cache/schema/ folder, then I added nodes to my ODL Controller's netconf_topology with: { "node": [ { "node-id": "CORE0", "netconf-node-topology:host": "10.100.100.11", "netconf-node-topology:password": "netconf123!", "netconf-node-topology:username": "netconf", "netconf-node-topology:port": 830, "netconf-node-topology:tcp-only": false, "netconf-node-topology:keepalive-delay": 0 } ] }

Now I see my nodes into netconf_topology but most of capabilities are unresolved: { "node": [ { "node-id": "CORE0", "netconf-node-topology:unavailable-capabilities": { "unavailable-capability": [ { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/routing-instances?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-routing-instances", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/set?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-set", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/routing-options?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-routing-options", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/system?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-system", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/ted?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-ted", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/interfaces?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-interfaces", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/rsvp?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-rsvp", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/protocols?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-protocols", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/spring-traffic-engineering?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-spring-traffic-engineering", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/clear?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-clear", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/forwarding-options?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-forwarding-options", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/bfd?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-bfd", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/policy-options?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-policy-options", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/dynamic-profile?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-dynamic-profile", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/ping?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-ping", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/help?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-help", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/ripng?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-ripng", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/path-computation-client?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-path-computation-client", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/vmhost?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-vmhost", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/rpc/telemetry-agentd?revision=2017-01-01)junos-rpc-telemetry-agentd", "failure-reason": "unable-to-resolve" } ] }, "netconf-node-topology:available-capabilities": { "available-capability": [ { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-netconf-monitoring" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:capability:candidate:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:confirmed-commit:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "http://xml.juniper.net/dmi/system/1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:netconf:base:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:base:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:capability:confirmed-commit:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:url:1.0?protocol=http,ftp,file" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:validate:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:netconf:capability:candidate:1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "http://xml.juniper.net/netconf/junos/1.0" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:capability:url:1.0?protocol=http,ftp,file" }, { "capability-origin": "device-advertised", "capability": "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:netconf:capability:validate:1.0" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/common/types?revision=2017-01-01)junos-common-types" }, { "capability": "(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/diameter?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-diameter" } ] }, } ] }

Still, all the files are present: [root@localhost ~]#ll karaf-0.8.0/cache/schema/ | grep junos-rpc-spring-traffic-engineering -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6803 Apr 24 11:25 junos-rpc-spring-traffic-engineering@2017-01-01.yang

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Could be ODL is struggling with some of the models. Unfortunately ODL is super-strict when parsing models and the result is that sometimes you have to manually fix up a model to make it work.

If you turn on netconf debugging, and maybe Yangtools too, then you may find something in the logs....

On 24 Apr 2019, at 12:32, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

I think that the problem is that ODL is not impoting/resolving correctly yang modules which I put into /cache/schema/ directory, and because of this Pathman can't send/retrieve correct commands to/from vMX.

What is wrong ? I've put all the yang modules from https://github.com/Juniper/yang for specific version and put it into /cache/schema/ folder, then I added nodes to my ODL Controller's netconf_topology with: { "node": [ { "node-id": "CORE0", "netconf-node-topology:host": "10.100.100.11", "netconf-node-topology:password": "netconf123!", "netconf-node-topology:username": "netconf", "netconf-node-topology:port": 830, "netconf-node-topology:tcp-only": false, "netconf-node-topology:keepalive-delay": 0 } ] }

Still, all the files are present: [root@localhost ~]#ll karaf-0.8.0/cache/schema/ | grep junos-rpc-spring-traffic-engineering -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 6803 Apr 24 11:25 junos-rpc-spring-traffic-engineering@2017-01-01.yangmailto:junos-rpc-spring-traffic-engineering@2017-01-01.yang

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-486184774, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMGZWD5TR6V7IJCMYWLLPSBAJ7ANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

@gilesheron

I tried to DEBUG netconf and yangtools, but still, in the logs I get only: ImmutableUnkeyedListEntryNode{nodeIdentifier=(urn:opendaylight:netconf-node-topology?revision=2015-01-14)unavailable-capability, value=[ImmutableLeafNode{nodeIdentifier=(urn:opendaylight:netconf-node-topology?revision=2015-01-14)capability, value=(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/protocols?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-protocols, attributes={}}, ImmutableLeafNode{nodeIdentifier=(urn:opendaylight:netconf-node-topology?revision=2015-01-14)failure-reason, value=unable-to-resolve, attributes={}}], attributes={}},

But all the modules are present in /cache/schema : [root@localhost ~]# ll karaf-0.8.0/cache/schema/ | grep junos-conf-protocols -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1338410 Apr 24 11:25 junos-conf-protocols@2017-01-01.yang

And to be honest I have no idea what else I can do... Already read a lot on google/forums, still don't know how to figure It out to resolve Junos yang modules/schema...

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

There may be an error earlier in the log. Search for “ERROR” maybe?

Or send the logs over - tho has been a while since I did anything ODL-related...

On 24 Apr 2019, at 13:03, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

@gilesheronhttps://github.com/gilesheron

I tried to DEBUG netconf and yangtools, but still, in the logs I get only: ImmutableUnkeyedListEntryNode{nodeIdentifier=(urn:opendaylight:netconf-node-topology?revision=2015-01-14)unavailable-capability, value=[ImmutableLeafNode{nodeIdentifier=(urn:opendaylight:netconf-node-topology?revision=2015-01-14)capability, value=(http://yang.juniper.net/junos/conf/protocols?revision=2017-01-01)junos-conf-protocols, attributes={}}, ImmutableLeafNode{nodeIdentifier=(urn:opendaylight:netconf-node-topology?revision=2015-01-14)failure-reason, value=unable-to-resolve, attributes={}}], attributes={}},

But all the modules are present in /cache/schema : [root@localhost ~]# ll karaf-0.8.0/cache/schema/ | grep junos-conf-protocols -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1338410 Apr 24 11:25 junos-conf-protocols@2017-01-01.yangmailto:junos-conf-protocols@2017-01-01.yang

And to be honest I have no idea what else I can do... Already read a lot on google/forums, still don't know how to figure It out to resolve Junos yang modules/schema...

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-486199147, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMGYRR2ZQAYN2XNXOGDDPSBD5FANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

@gilesheron I made a debug on Yangtools and Netconf... Tried to grep for ERROR, still didn't find anything related to yang modules..

I attached all log files from the moment when I added devices to netconf-topology and until the status from ODL to my nodes changed to Connected.

Maybe you can find something that can help me to figure it out.

karaf_logs.zip

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

I finally managed to add nodes to topology_netconf without any erros.. I simply changed the JunOS version of my vMX routers to 17.4R1.16, and uploaded yang modules for this version. Now, I see no errors with my nodes in ODL Controller, all modules are added, and all capabilities are resolved.

I attached a file with a reply for my GET request "/restconf/operational/network-topology:network-topology/"

Still, now when I try to deploy a LSP, I still see this logs:

Juniper vMX Router pcep trace: Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 92, flags: 0x0 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 1 lsp_setup_type: 0 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'CORE1 -> EQUINIX' Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.10, destination: 10.100.100.20 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 2 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received: Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: ...!........... 20 0C 00 5C 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: ................ 00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 1C 00 00 00 09 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: ....CORE1.->.EQU 00 11 00 10 43 4F 52 45 31 20 2D 3E 20 45 51 55 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: INIX.....dd..dd. 49 4E 49 58 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0A 0A 64 64 14 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: .........}...dd. 07 10 00 1C 05 0C 10 01 00 7D B0 00 0A 64 64 0B Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_msg_parse: .....~@..dd. 05 0C 10 01 00 7E 40 00 0A 64 64 14 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() --> Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x84cf3c0 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl' Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pccd_core_received_pccreate() --> Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 1 lsp_setup_type: 48 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 10, value: 3 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432 Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <-- Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): Handling of PCCreate failed Apr 25 13:42:11 [6397] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() <--

ODL Nitrogen Controller: 2019-04-25T14:02:54,505 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-21 | PCEPSessionImpl | 383 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-impl - 0.9.0 | Closing PCEP session: PCEPSessionImpl{channel=[id: 0x3ba13f73, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 - R:/10.100.100.10:55337], localOpen=Open [_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=2, _tlvs=Tlvs [augmentation=[Tlvs1 [_srPceCapability=SrPceCapability [_msd=0, augmentation=[]]], Tlvs1 [_stateful=Stateful [_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1 [_initiation=true], Stateful1 [_deltaLspSyncCapability=true, _includeDbVersion=true, _triggeredInitialSync=true, _triggeredResync=true]]]]]], augmentation=[]], remoteOpen=Open [_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=1, _tlvs=Tlvs [augmentation=[Tlvs1 [_stateful=Stateful [_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1 [_initiation=true], Stateful1 []]]], Tlvs3 [], Tlvs1 []]], _version=ProtocolVersion [_value=1], _ignore=false, _processingRule=false, augmentation=[]]} 2019-04-25T14:02:54,505 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-21 | PCEPSessionImpl | 383 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-impl - 0.9.0 | Closing PCEP session channel: [id: 0x3ba13f73, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 - R:/10.100.100.10:55337] 2019-04-25T14:02:54,506 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-21 | AbstractTopologySessionListener | 387 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-topology-provider - 0.9.0 | Session PCEPSessionImpl{channel=[id: 0x3ba13f73, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 ! R:/10.100.100.10:55337], localOpen=Open [_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=2, _tlvs=Tlvs [augmentation=[Tlvs1 [_srPceCapability=SrPceCapability [_msd=0, augmentation=[]]], Tlvs1 [_stateful=Stateful [_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1 [_initiation=true], Stateful1 [_deltaLspSyncCapability=true, _includeDbVersion=true, _triggeredInitialSync=true, _triggeredResync=true]]]]]], augmentation=[]], remoteOpen=Open [_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=1, _tlvs=Tlvs [augmentation=[Tlvs1 [_stateful=Stateful [_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1 [_initiation=true], Stateful1 []]]], Tlvs3 [], Tlvs1 []]], _version=ProtocolVersion [_value=1], _ignore=false, _processingRule=false, augmentation=[]]} terminated by peer with reason PCEPCloseTermination{reason=UNKNOWN} 2019-04-25T14:02:54,517 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-22 | PCEPSessionNegotiator | 383 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-impl - 0.9.0 | Replacing bootstrap negotiator for channel [id: 0x95caddb9, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 - R:/10.100.100.10:52328] 2019-04-25T14:02:54,518 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-22 | AbstractPCEPSessionNegotiator | 383 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-impl - 0.9.0 | PCEP session with [id: 0x95caddb9, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 - R:/10.100.100.10:52328] started, sent proposal Open [_deadTimer=120, _keepalive=30, _sessionId=3, _tlvs=Tlvs [augmentation=[Tlvs1 [_srPceCapability=SrPceCapability [_msd=0, augmentation=[]]], Tlvs1 [_stateful=Stateful [_lspUpdateCapability=true, augmentation=[Stateful1 [_initiation=true], Stateful1 [_deltaLspSyncCapability=true, _includeDbVersion=true, _triggeredInitialSync=true, _triggeredResync=true]]]]]], augmentation=[]] 2019-04-25T14:02:54,536 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-22 | AbstractPCEPSessionNegotiator | 383 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-impl - 0.9.0 | PCEP peer [id: 0x95caddb9, L:/10.10.1.134:4189 - R:/10.100.100.10:52328] completed negotiation 2019-04-25T14:02:54,536 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-22 | PCEPSessionImpl | 383 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-impl - 0.9.0 | Session /10.10.1.134:4189[3] <-> /10.100.100.10:52328[2] started 2019-04-25T14:02:54,538 | INFO | epollEventLoopGroup-11-22 | AbstractTopologySessionListener | 387 - org.opendaylight.bgpcep.pcep-topology-provider - 0.9.0 | Session with /10.100.100.10 attached to topology node KeyedInstanceIdentifier{targetType=interface org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.tbd.params.xml.ns.yang.network.topology.rev131021.network.topology.topology.Node, path=[org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.tbd.params.xml.ns.yang.network.topology.rev131021.NetworkTopology, org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.tbd.params.xml.ns.yang.network.topology.rev131021.network.topology.Topology[key=TopologyKey [_topologyId=Uri [_value=pcep-topology]]], org.opendaylight.yang.gen.v1.urn.tbd.params.xml.ns.yang.network.topology.rev131021.network.topology.topology.Node[key=NodeKey [_nodeId=Uri [_value=pcc://10.100.100.10]]]]}

Pathman logs: 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:22.052 UTC root:rest_interface_parser INFO: Commands Relieved: {u'path': [u'CORE1', u'CORE0', u'EQUINIX'], u'option': u'create', u'name': u'CORE1 -> EQUINIX'} 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:22.053 UTC root:get_loop_list INFO: Path: [u'CORE1', u'CORE0', u'EQUINIX'] 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:22.053 UTC root:get_loop_list INFO: Loop list: [u'10.100.100.11', u'10.100.100.20'] 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:22.053 UTC root:get_sid_list INFO: Path: [u'CORE1', u'CORE0', u'EQUINIX'] 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:22.053 UTC root:get_sid_list INFO: SID list: [2011, 2020] 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:22.106 UTC root:createSRtunnel INFO: Create SR Tunnel response: {u'output': {u'failure': u'failed', u'error': [{u'error-object': {u'ignore': True, u'processing-rule': True, u'type': 10, u'value': 5}}]}} 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:24.108 UTC root:post INFO: {"response": [{"cause": {"failure": "failed", "error": [{"error-object": {"ignore": true, "processing-rule": true, "type": 10, "value": 5}}]}, "option": "create", "success": false}]} 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:24.128 UTC root:initialize INFO: Init 2 done - debug saved 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:24.129 UTC root:rest_interface_parser INFO: Commands Relieved: {u'option': u'list_all'} 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:24.140 UTC root:get_url INFO: Url get Status: 200 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:24.140 UTC root:listAllLsp INFO: list: [], formatted: [] 27200 2019-04-25 11:03:24.141 UTC root:post INFO: {"response": [{"list": [], "option": "list_all", "success": true}]}

So, all the time, I get the PCEP Error-type:10 with value:5, which means: Error-Type:10 -> Reception of an invalid object Value:5 -> ERO mixes SR-ERO subobjects with other subobject types

I am not sure... but maybe I have to add some other yang modules/schema to ODL Controller so that it can convert Segment Routing LSP configuration provided from Pathman-SR to JunOS language ? As I understand, the SR-ERO provided from Pathman-SR is not recongized or is not read correctly by JunOS...

Any ideas ?

operational-network-topologynetwork-topology.txt

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

I think I found the problem.. It is because I have to change iana-sr-subobject as it is written in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06

In Open Day Light documentation, I see:

PCEP Segment Routing Conforms draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-01 - PCEP extension for Segment Routing,

The default configuration file is located in etc/opendaylight/karaf.

33-pcep-segment-routing.xml MIGHT NOT BE NEEDED: you might need a switch from sub-object EXPLICIT_ROUTE and ROUTE_RECORD code point 5/6 to code point 36 defined by draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06. Switch the field iana-sr-subobjects-type to true if your router supports code point 36.

prefix:pcep-parser-segment-routing pcep-parser-segment-routing true-->

4: iana-sr-subobjects-type - IANA is requested to allocate code points (36) in the RSVP Parameters registry for SR-ERO and SR-RRO. To use IANA assigned type set the value to true, to preserve code points 5/6, set value bellow to false or remove (false by default);

But unfortunatelly I don't have 33-pcep-segment-routing.xml in my karaf directory and I cant change it via REST API as well.. When I PUT "URL: /restconf/config/pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config" "Body":

true

It returns me: { "errors": { "error": [ { "error-type": "protocol", "error-tag": "invalid-value", "error-message": "URI has bad format. Possible reasons:\n 1. \"pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config\" was not found in parent data node.\n 2. \"pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config\" is behind mount point. Then it should be in format \"/yang-ext:mount/pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config\"." } ] } }

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Shouldn’t it be pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-config, as per:

https://github.com/opendaylight/bgpcep/blob/master/pcep/segment-routing/src/main/yang/pcep-segment-routing-app-config.yang

Giles

On 25 Apr 2019, at 16:18, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

I think I found the problem.. It is because I have to change iana-sr-subobject as it is written in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06

In Open Day Light documentation, I see:

PCEP Segment Routing Conforms draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-01 - PCEP extension for Segment Routing,

The default configuration file is located in etc/opendaylight/karaf.

33-pcep-segment-routing.xml MIGHT NOT BE NEEDED: you might need a switch from sub-object EXPLICIT_ROUTE and ROUTE_RECORD code point 5/6 to code point 36 defined by draft https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06. Switch the field iana-sr-subobjects-type to true if your router supports code point 36.

prefix:pcep-parser-segment-routing pcep-parser-segment-routing true--> 4: iana-sr-subobjects-type - IANA is requested to allocate code points (36) in the RSVP Parameters registry for SR-ERO and SR-RRO. To use IANA assigned type set the value to true, to preserve code points 5/6, set value bellow to false or remove (false by default);

But unfortunatelly I don't have 33-pcep-segment-routing.xml in my karaf directory and I cant change it via REST API as well.. When I PUT "URL: /restconf/config/pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config" "Body":

true

It returns me: { "errors": { "error": [ { "error-type": "protocol", "error-tag": "invalid-value", "error-message": "URI has bad format. Possible reasons:\n 1. "pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config" was not found in parent data node.\n 2. "pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config" is behind mount point. Then it should be in format "/yang-ext:mount/pcep-segment-routing-app-config:pcep-segment-routing-app-config"." } ] } }

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-486692204, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG2S6ZMHCZL6YHAXIQLPSG4UPANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

I've managed to change iana-sr-subobject as it is written in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06 with the help of DLUX interface and yang modules there... Still, now I get another error.. When I try to create a simple RSVP tunnel, It works, but BGP Pathman doesn't work :). If I try to create Segment Routing LSP, Pathman-SR works well, but I got this error: Error-Type: 24 Error-Value: 1 or Error-Value:2.

This is how I try to create the LSP dirrectly from ODL Controller:

<input xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:topology:pcep">
   <node>pcc://10.100.100.11</node>
   <name>TEST-LSP</name>
   <arguments>
      <lsp xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <delegate>true</delegate>
         <administrative>true</administrative>
      </lsp>
      <endpoints-obj>
         <ipv4>
            <source-ipv4-address>10.100.100.11</source-ipv4-address>
            <destination-ipv4-address>10.100.100.22</destination-ipv4-address>
         </ipv4>
          <processing-rule>true</processing-rule>
      </endpoints-obj>
      <path-setup-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <pst>1</pst>
      </path-setup-type>
      <ero>
         <subobject>
            <loose>false</loose>
            <sid-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">ipv4-node-id</sid-type>
            <m-flag xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">true</m-flag>
            <sid xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">2022</sid>
            <ip-address xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">37.233.0.14</ip-address>
        </subobject>
      </ero>
   </arguments>
   <network-topology-ref xmlns:topo="urn:TBD:params:xml:ns:yang:network-topology">/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]</network-topology-ref>
</input>

And I get this error:

{
    "output": {
        "failure": "failed",
        "error": [
            {
                "error-object": {
                    "type": 23,
                    "value": 1,
                    "ignore": true,
                    "processing-rule": true
                }
            }
        ]
    }
}

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Hi,

Is that error 23, or 24?

(Your text says 24 but the cut-and-paste says 23).

At any rate the errors are here:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-error-object

Error 23 value 1 is “SYMBOLIC-PATH-NAME” in use”. Do you already have an LSP on that router called “TEST-LSP”?

G.

On 29 Apr 2019, at 11:28, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

I've managed to change iana-sr-subobject as it is written in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06 with the help of DLUX interface and yang modules there... Still, now I get another error.. When I try to create a simple RSVP tunnel, It works, but BGP Pathman doesn't work :). If I try to create Segment Routing LSP, Pathman-SR works well, but I got this error: Error-Type: 24 Error-Value: 1 or Error-Value:2.

This is how I try to create the LSP dirrectly from ODL Controller:

pcc://10.100.100.11 TEST-LSP true true

10.100.100.11

10.100.100.22

true

1

false

ipv4-node-id

true

50011

37.233.0.14

/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]

And I get this error:

{ "output": { "failure": "failed", "error": [ { "error-object": { "type": 23, "value": 1, "ignore": true, "processing-rule": true } } ] } }

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487514190, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG4JALFGYQ2ZOERIF33PS25SXANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Yes sorry, it is error 23, and I don't have such an LSP on the router... It give me Error-Type 23 Error-Value=2. But when I try to deploy this path once again, it says Error-Type 23 Error-Value=1.

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 12:38 Giles Heron, notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi,

Is that error 23, or 24?

(Your text says 24 but the cut-and-paste says 23).

At any rate the errors are here:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-error-object

Error 23 value 1 is “SYMBOLIC-PATH-NAME” in use”. Do you already have an LSP on that router called “TEST-LSP”?

G.

On 29 Apr 2019, at 11:28, avisnevschi <notifications@github.com<mailto: notifications@github.com>> wrote:

I've managed to change iana-sr-subobject as it is written in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06 with the help of DLUX interface and yang modules there... Still, now I get another error.. When I try to create a simple RSVP tunnel, It works, but BGP Pathman doesn't work :). If I try to create Segment Routing LSP, Pathman-SR works well, but I got this error: Error-Type: 24 Error-Value: 1 or Error-Value:2.

This is how I try to create the LSP dirrectly from ODL Controller:
pcc://10.100.100.11 TEST-LSP true true 10.100.100.11 10.100.100.22 true 1 false ipv4-node-id true 50011 37.233.0.14
<network-topology-ref xmlns:topo="urn:TBD:params:xml:ns:yang:network-topology">/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]

And I get this error:

{ "output": { "failure": "failed", "error": [ { "error-object": { "type": 23, "value": 1, "ignore": true, "processing-rule": true } } ] } }

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub< https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487514190>, or mute the thread< https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG4JALFGYQ2ZOERIF33PS25SXANCNFSM4HHE4PDA>.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487517022, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AL3HQP7ILMAP4NCSD5NQ4EDPS26ZJANCNFSM4HHE4PDA .

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

I tried now once again, and with such a request:

<input xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:topology:pcep">
   <node>pcc://10.100.100.11</node>
   <name>TEST-LSP1</name>
   <arguments>
      <lsp xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <delegate>true</delegate>
         <administrative>true</administrative>
      </lsp>
      <endpoints-obj>
         <ipv4>
            <source-ipv4-address>10.100.100.11</source-ipv4-address>
            <destination-ipv4-address>10.100.100.22</destination-ipv4-address>
         </ipv4>
          <processing-rule>true</processing-rule>
      </endpoints-obj>
      <path-setup-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <pst>1</pst>
      </path-setup-type>
      <ero>
         <subobject>
            <loose>false</loose>
            <sid-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">ipv4-node-id</sid-type>
            <m-flag xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">true</m-flag>
            <sid xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">50011</sid>
            <ip-address xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">37.233.0.14</ip-address>
        </subobject>
      </ero>
   </arguments>
   <network-topology-ref xmlns:topo="urn:TBD:params:xml:ns:yang:network-topology">/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]</network-topology-ref>
</input>

It returns me this error:

{
    "output": {
        "failure": "failed",
        "error": [
            {
                "error-object": {
                    "type": 24,
                    "value": 2,
                    "ignore": true,
                    "processing-rule": true
                }
            }
        ]
    }
}

Then, if I send the same request once again, I get the Error-Type 23 and Error-Value:1.

The logs from the router:

Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 76, flags: 0x0
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 1 lsp_setup_type: 0
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.11, destination: 10.100.100.22
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace_ero: SPRING SUB-OBJECT: loose: 0, sid_type: 1, sid: 50011
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received:
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ...L!...........  20 0C 00 4C 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ................  00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 18 00 00 00 09
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ....TEST-LSP1...  00 11 00 09 54 45 53 54 2D 4C 53 50 31 00 00 00
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: .....dd..dd.....  04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0B 0A 64 64 16 07 10 00 10
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: $....5..%...      24 0C 10 01 0C 35 B0 00 25 E9 00 0E
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x8425140 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1' from TLV
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero(): Added SID lebel-20 is: 50011
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 0
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID lebel type: 2
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: 1539506176
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.14
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_provisioned_lsps_increase_counter(): Provisioned LSPs counter increased: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Creating LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Got LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1', Path name: '(null)' and priority: '(null)'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate(): sending create request to RPD for LSP: 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): tx pccreate name(TEST-LSP1) path() template() src(10.100.100.11) dst(10.100.100.11) msg_trigger() type(3) state(4) control(0) flags(0x0) admin grp exclude(0) admin grp include any(0) admin grp include all(0) setup prio(0) hold prio(0) bw(0bps) metric(0)
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info():     lsp_id(0) tunnel_id(0) setup_type(1) ero(0x0) ero_len(0) rro(0x0) rro_len(0) sr-ero(0x84a10f0), sr-ero_len(0) sr-rro(0x0) sr-rro_len(0) err_spec(0x0) err_spec_len(0) #assoc(0)
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 0
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID level type: 2
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: 1539506176
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.14
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info():     path_flags(0) new AuBw(0bps) #paths(0) assoc()local_cspf(0)
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate(): lsp_params->setup_type: 1
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_reconfig_lsp(): LSP 0x847d000, template name
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp(): Stored new LSP as :TEST-LSP1 for LSP TEST-LSP1  with path '' id 4
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp(): Storing LSP ID 4
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): PCE: 'odl' created provisioned LSP: 'TEST-LSP1' id: 4
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() <--
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_sock_readable_cb(): There's something to read on rpd's fd 11
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err_recv() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err() -->
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): RPD LSP Error: Attempt to update local LSP (errno:4), lsp: 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): Unable to Update/Delete LSP hence send error msg to PCE
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr(): Found cached LSP id: 4 in pce 'odl'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error'
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 1 lsp_setup_type: 48
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 24, value: 2
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432
Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr() <--

And the second request:

Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 76, flags: 0x0
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 2 lsp_setup_type: 0
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'TEST-LSP1'
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.11, destination: 10.100.100.22
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace_ero: SPRING SUB-OBJECT: loose: 0, sid_type: 1, sid: 50011
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received:
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ...L!...........  20 0C 00 4C 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ................  00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 18 00 00 00 09
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ....TEST-LSP1...  00 11 00 09 54 45 53 54 2D 4C 53 50 31 00 00 00
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: .....dd..dd.....  04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0B 0A 64 64 16 07 10 00 10
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: $....5..%...      24 0C 10 01 0C 35 B0 00 25 E9 00 0E
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() -->
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x8425140 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl'
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() -->
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1' from TLV
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() -->
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() -->
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero(): Added SID lebel-20 is: 50011
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 0
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID lebel type: 2
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: 1539506176
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.14
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <--
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <--
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): PCE: 'odl' cannot create LSP(TEST-LSP1) - name exists
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error'
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 2 lsp_setup_type: 48
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 23, value: 1
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <--
Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): Handling of PCCreate failed

Any ideas on why I get Error 24 with Value 2 ? I've read that it is LSP instantiation error and 2: Internal error but I don't know what to do to troubleshoot it or solve it... Could it be because of virtual enviroment or.. I don't know..

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Right - so "unacceptable instantiation parameters”. Guess that’s a bit generic :)

Is the ERO complete? Usually with strict paths I’d expect to see the egress router in the path as well as all intermediate hops (I think - it has been a couple of years since I played with this).

I guess you could try loose to start with?

Giles

On 29 Apr 2019, at 11:39, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Yes sorry, error 24

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019, 12:38 Giles Heron, notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Hi,

Is that error 23, or 24?

(Your text says 24 but the cut-and-paste says 23).

At any rate the errors are here:

https://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep/pcep.xhtml#pcep-error-object

Error 23 value 1 is “SYMBOLIC-PATH-NAME” in use”. Do you already have an LSP on that router called “TEST-LSP”?

G.

On 29 Apr 2019, at 11:28, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com<mailto: notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com>> wrote:

I've managed to change iana-sr-subobject as it is written in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-06 with the help of DLUX interface and yang modules there... Still, now I get another error.. When I try to create a simple RSVP tunnel, It works, but BGP Pathman doesn't work :). If I try to create Segment Routing LSP, Pathman-SR works well, but I got this error: Error-Type: 24 Error-Value: 1 or Error-Value:2.

This is how I try to create the LSP dirrectly from ODL Controller:
pcc://10.100.100.11 TEST-LSP true true 10.100.100.11 10.100.100.22 true 1 false ipv4-node-id true 50011 37.233.0.14
<network-topology-ref xmlns:topo="urn:TBD:params:xml:ns:yang:network-topology">/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]

And I get this error:

{ "output": { "failure": "failed", "error": [ { "error-object": { "type": 23, "value": 1, "ignore": true, "processing-rule": true } } ] } }

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub< https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487514190>, or mute the thread< https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG4JALFGYQ2ZOERIF33PS25SXANCNFSM4HHE4PDA>.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487517022, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AL3HQP7ILMAP4NCSD5NQ4EDPS26ZJANCNFSM4HHE4PDA .

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487517462, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG43XAFJPKICKPATJFTPS2663ANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Hmm - maybe the first setup is failing but either ODL or router is failing to clear up all the state associated with the LSP?

On 29 Apr 2019, at 11:58, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

I tried now once again, and with such a request: pcc://10.100.100.11 TEST-LSP1 true true 10.100.100.11 10.100.100.22 true 1 false ipv4-node-id true 50011 37.233.0.14 /topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]

It returns me this error: { "output": { "failure": "failed", "error": [ { "error-object": { "type": 24, "value": 2, "ignore": true, "processing-rule": true } } ] } }

Then, if I send the same request once again, I get the Error-Type 23 and Error-Value:1.

The logs from the router: Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 76, flags: 0x0 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 1 lsp_setup_type: 0 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.11, destination: 10.100.100.22 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace_ero: SPRING SUB-OBJECT: loose: 0, sid_type: 1, sid: 50011 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received: Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ...L!........... 20 0C 00 4C 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ................ 00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 18 00 00 00 09 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ....TEST-LSP1... 00 11 00 09 54 45 53 54 2D 4C 53 50 31 00 00 00 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: .....dd..dd..... 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0B 0A 64 64 16 07 10 00 10 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: $....5..%... 24 0C 10 01 0C 35 B0 00 25 E9 00 0E Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x8425140 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1' from TLV Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero(): Added SID lebel-20 is: 50011 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 0 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID lebel type: 2 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: 1539506176 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.14 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_provisioned_lsps_increase_counter(): Provisioned LSPs counter increased: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Creating LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Got LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1', Path name: '(null)' and priority: '(null)' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate(): sending create request to RPD for LSP: 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): tx pccreate name(TEST-LSP1) path() template() src(10.100.100.11) dst(10.100.100.11) msg_trigger() type(3) state(4) control(0) flags(0x0) admin grp exclude(0) admin grp include any(0) admin grp include all(0) setup prio(0) hold prio(0) bw(0bps) metric(0) Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): lsp_id(0) tunnel_id(0) setup_type(1) ero(0x0) ero_len(0) rro(0x0) rro_len(0) sr-ero(0x84a10f0), sr-ero_len(0) sr-rro(0x0) sr-rro_len(0) err_spec(0x0) err_spec_len(0) #assoc(0) Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 0 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID level type: 2 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: 1539506176 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.14 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): path_flags(0) new AuBw(0bps) #paths(0) assoc()local_cspf(0) Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate(): lsp_params->setup_type: 1 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_reconfig_lsp(): LSP 0x847d000, template name Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp(): Stored new LSP as :TEST-LSP1 for LSP TEST-LSP1 with path '' id 4 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp(): Storing LSP ID 4 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): PCE: 'odl' created provisioned LSP: 'TEST-LSP1' id: 4 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() <-- Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_sock_readable_cb(): There's something to read on rpd's fd 11 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err_recv() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err() --> Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): RPD LSP Error: Attempt to update local LSP (errno:4), lsp: 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): Unable to Update/Delete LSP hence send error msg to PCE Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr(): Found cached LSP id: 4 in pce 'odl' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 1 lsp_setup_type: 48 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 24, value: 2 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432 Apr 29 12:53:00 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr() <--

And the second request: Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 76, flags: 0x0 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 2 lsp_setup_type: 0 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'TEST-LSP1' Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.11, destination: 10.100.100.22 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace_ero: SPRING SUB-OBJECT: loose: 0, sid_type: 1, sid: 50011 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received: Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ...L!........... 20 0C 00 4C 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 02 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ................ 00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 18 00 00 00 09 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ....TEST-LSP1... 00 11 00 09 54 45 53 54 2D 4C 53 50 31 00 00 00 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: .....dd..dd..... 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0B 0A 64 64 16 07 10 00 10 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: $....5..%... 24 0C 10 01 0C 35 B0 00 25 E9 00 0E Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() --> Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x8425140 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl' Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() --> Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'TEST-LSP1' from TLV Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() --> Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() --> Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero(): Added SID lebel-20 is: 50011 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 0 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID lebel type: 2 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: 1539506176 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.14 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <-- Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <-- Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): PCE: 'odl' cannot create LSP(TEST-LSP1) - name exists Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 2 lsp_setup_type: 48 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 23, value: 1 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432 Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <-- Apr 29 12:53:46 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): Handling of PCCreate failed

Any ideas on why I get Error 24 with Value 2 ? I've read that it is LSP instantiation error and 2: Internal error but I don't know what to do to troubleshoot it or solve it... Could it be because of virtual enviroment or.. I don't know..

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487522615, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMGZONEYT7MEHOSMIPYTPS3BE5ANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Probably the ODL controller doesn't clean it up because on the router I don't see any LSPs.

Now I tried once again to deploy a path, with Loose set as true.

<input xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:topology:pcep">
   <node>pcc://10.100.100.11</node>
   <name>LSP-to-NXDATA</name>
   <arguments>
      <lsp xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <delegate>true</delegate>
         <administrative>true</administrative>
      </lsp>
      <endpoints-obj>
         <ipv4>
            <source-ipv4-address>10.100.100.11</source-ipv4-address>
            <destination-ipv4-address>10.100.100.22</destination-ipv4-address>
         </ipv4>
          <processing-rule>true</processing-rule>
      </endpoints-obj>
      <path-setup-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <pst>1</pst>
      </path-setup-type>
      <ero>
         <subobject>
            <loose>true</loose>
            <sid-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">ipv4-node-id</sid-type>
            <m-flag xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">true</m-flag>
            <sid xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">2010</sid>
            <ip-address xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">37.233.0.17</ip-address>
        </subobject>
      </ero>
   </arguments>
   <network-topology-ref xmlns:topo="urn:TBD:params:xml:ns:yang:network-topology">/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]</network-topology-ref>
</input>

The topology is the following: Router(IP:10.100.100.11, SID:2011) -> Router(IP:10.100.100.10, SID:2010) -> Router(IP:10.100.100.22, SID:2022)

This is the log from the router:

Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 80, flags: 0x0
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 3 lsp_setup_type: 0
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.11, destination: 10.100.100.22
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace_ero: SPRING SUB-OBJECT: loose: 1, sid_type: 1, sid: 2010
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received:
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ...P!...........  20 0C 00 50 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 03
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ................  00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 1C 00 00 00 09
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ....LSP-to-NXDAT  00 11 00 0D 4C 53 50 2D 74 6F 2D 4E 58 44 41 54
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: A........dd..dd.  41 00 00 00 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0B 0A 64 64 16
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: .........}..%...  07 10 00 10 A4 0C 10 01 00 7D A0 00 25 E9 00 11
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse:
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x8425140 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' from TLV
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero(): Added SID lebel-20 is: 2010
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID lebel type: 2
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: -637075456
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.17
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_provisioned_lsps_increase_counter(): Provisioned LSPs counter increased: 2
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Creating LSP name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Got LSP name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA', Path name: '(null)' and priority: '(null)'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate(): sending create request to RPD for LSP: 'LSP-to-NXDATA'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): tx pccreate name(LSP-to-NXDATA) path() template() src(10.100.100.11) dst(10.100.100.11) msg_trigger() type(3) state(4) control(0) flags(0x0) admin grp exclude(0) admin grp include any(0) admin grp include all(0) setup prio(0) hold prio(0) bw(0bps) metric(0)
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info():     lsp_id(0) tunnel_id(0) setup_type(1) ero(0x0) ero_len(0) rro(0x0) rro_len(0) sr-ero(0x84a1210), sr-ero_len(0) sr-rro(0x0) sr-rro_len(0) err_spec(0x0) err_spec_len(0) #assoc(0)
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID level type: 2
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: -637075456
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.17
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info():     path_flags(0) new AuBw(0bps) #paths(0) assoc()local_cspf(0)
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate(): lsp_params->setup_type: 1
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_reconfig_lsp(): LSP 0x847d280, template name
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp(): Stored new LSP as :LSP-to-NXDATA for LSP LSP-to-NXDATA  with path '' id 5
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'LSP-to-NXDATA'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'LSP-to-NXDATA'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp(): Storing LSP ID 5
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): PCE: 'odl' created provisioned LSP: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' id: 5
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() <--
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_sock_readable_cb(): There's something to read on rpd's fd 11
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err_recv() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err() -->
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): RPD LSP Error: Attempt to update local LSP (errno:4), lsp: 'LSP-to-NXDATA'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): Unable to Update/Delete LSP hence send error msg to PCE
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr(): Found cached LSP id: 5 in pce 'odl'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error'
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 3 lsp_setup_type: 48
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 24, value: 2
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432
Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr() <--

When I try to deploy the path from Pathman-SR, I get the same error, but I don't think it compute wrong ERO, because in logs I see all the SIDs, and they are correct.

If you want, I can give you access to ODL Controller and my LAB enviroment in EVE-NG.

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Could you try with the IP-address in the ERO set to 10.100.100.10? I’m guessing that’s the node-id.

On 29 Apr 2019, at 12:17, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Probably the ODL controller doesn't clean it up because on the router I don't see any LSPs.

Now I tried once again to deploy a path, with Loose set as true.

pcc://10.100.100.11 LSP-to-NXDATA true true

10.100.100.11

10.100.100.22

true

1

true

ipv4-node-id

true

2010

37.233.0.17

/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]

The topology is the following: Router(IP:10.100.100.11, SID:2011) -> Router(IP:10.100.100.10, SID:2010) -> Router(IP:10.100.100.20, SID:2020)

This is the log from the router:

Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Received PCEP message type: PCCreate, version: 1 length: 80, flags: 0x0 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 0 srp_id: 3 lsp_setup_type: 0 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV path setup setup: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: LSP object: plsp ID: 0, remove: 0, operational: 0, last_update: 0, delegated: 1 administrative: 1 is_p2mp 0, PCE Created: 0 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_tlv_trace: TLV LSP Symbolic Name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: END-POINTS IPv4 object: source: 10.100.100.11, destination: 10.100.100.22 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERO object: subobjects: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace_ero: SPRING SUB-OBJECT: loose: 1, sid_type: 1, sid: 2010 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: PCCreate message received: Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ...P!........... 20 0C 00 50 21 12 00 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 03 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ................ 00 1C 00 04 00 00 00 01 20 10 00 1C 00 00 00 09 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: ....LSP-to-NXDAT 00 11 00 0D 4C 53 50 2D 74 6F 2D 4E 58 44 41 54 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: A........dd..dd. 41 00 00 00 04 12 00 0C 0A 64 64 0B 0A 64 64 16 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: .........}..%... 07 10 00 10 A4 0C 10 01 00 7D A0 00 25 E9 00 11 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_msg_parse: Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] process_message: Deadtimer has been touched Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb(): onmessage objp: 0x8425140 objc: 4 msg_type:12 pce:'odl' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Copying LSP name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' from TLV Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero(): Added SID lebel-20 is: 2010 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID lebel type: 2 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: -637075456 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.17 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_spring_ero() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_parse_lsp_instantion() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_provisioned_lsps_increase_counter(): Provisioned LSPs counter increased: 2 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Creating LSP name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): Got LSP name: 'LSP-to-NXDATA', Path name: '(null)' and priority: '(null)' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate(): sending create request to RPD for LSP: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): tx pccreate name(LSP-to-NXDATA) path() template() src(10.100.100.11) dst(10.100.100.11) msg_trigger() type(3) state(4) control(0) flags(0x0) admin grp exclude(0) admin grp include any(0) admin grp include all(0) setup prio(0) hold prio(0) bw(0bps) metric(0) Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): lsp_id(0) tunnel_id(0) setup_type(1) ero(0x0) ero_len(0) rro(0x0) rro_len(0) sr-ero(0x84a1210), sr-ero_len(0) sr-rro(0x0) sr-rro_len(0) err_spec(0x0) err_spec_len(0) #assoc(0) Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): Number of SR-ERO subobjects: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO loose_type: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO SID level type: 2 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO sid value: -637075456 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO NAI type: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_print_sr_ero_info(): SR-ERO IPv4-Node addr for subobject 0: 37.233.0.17 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_debug_lsp_info(): path_flags(0) new AuBw(0bps) #paths(0) assoc()local_cspf(0) Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate(): lsp_params->setup_type: 1 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_encode_pcupdate() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pcupdate_send() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_reconfig_lsp(): LSP 0x847d280, template name Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp(): Stored new LSP as :LSP-to-NXDATA for LSP LSP-to-NXDATA with path '' id 5 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_store_new_lsp() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_pccreate() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'LSP-to-NXDATA' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): LSP 'LSP-to-NXDATA' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp(): Storing LSP ID 5 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_store_lsp() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate(): PCE: 'odl' created provisioned LSP: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' id: 5 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_received_pccreate() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_pcep_onmessage_cb() <-- Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_sock_readable_cb(): There's something to read on rpd's fd 11 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err_recv() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err() --> Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): RPD LSP Error: Attempt to update local LSP (errno:4), lsp: 'LSP-to-NXDATA' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_rpd_lsp_err(): Unable to Update/Delete LSP hence send error msg to PCE Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr(): Found cached LSP id: 5 in pce 'odl' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_send_message: Sending PCEP message 'Error' Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: SRP object: remove: 48 srp_id: 3 lsp_setup_type: 48 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: ERROR object: type: 24, value: 2 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pcep_obj_trace: TLV Missing Request ID: 808464432 Apr 29 13:11:32 [6833] pccd_core_del_lspvec_senderr() <--

If you want, I can give you access to ODL Controller and my LAB enviroment in EVE-NG.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487527466, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMGZ45AVGCJDLPJPDESTPS3DM5ANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Yes, thats the node-id, but still, get the same error..

Request:

<input xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:topology:pcep">
   <node>pcc://10.100.100.11</node>
   <name>NEW-TEST-NXDATA</name>
   <arguments>
      <lsp xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <delegate>true</delegate>
         <administrative>true</administrative>
      </lsp>
      <endpoints-obj>
         <ipv4>
            <source-ipv4-address>10.100.100.11</source-ipv4-address>
            <destination-ipv4-address>10.100.100.22</destination-ipv4-address>
         </ipv4>
          <processing-rule>true</processing-rule>
      </endpoints-obj>
      <path-setup-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:ietf:stateful">
         <pst>1</pst>
      </path-setup-type>
      <ero>
         <subobject>
            <loose>true</loose>
            <sid-type xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">ipv4-node-id</sid-type>
            <m-flag xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">true</m-flag>
            <sid xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">2010</sid>
            <ip-address xmlns="urn:opendaylight:params:xml:ns:yang:pcep:segment:routing">10.100.100.10</ip-address>
        </subobject>
      </ero>
   </arguments>
   <network-topology-ref xmlns:topo="urn:TBD:params:xml:ns:yang:network-topology">/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]</network-topology-ref>
</input>

Response:

{
    "output": {
        "failure": "failed",
        "error": [
            {
                "error-object": {
                    "type": 24,
                    "value": 2,
                    "ignore": true,
                    "processing-rule": true
                }
            }
        ]
    }
}

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Odd. Not sure if the issue is in the ERO or in ODL. Problem is has been way too long since I worked with ODL :(

Niklas might have an idea. Otherwise you might need to ask on the ODL BGPCEP mailer

On 29 Apr 2019, at 12:26, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Yes, thats the node-id, but still, get the same error..

Request:

pcc://10.100.100.11 NEW-TEST-NXDATA true true

10.100.100.11

10.100.100.22

true

1

true

ipv4-node-id

true

2010

10.100.100.10

/topo:network-topology/topo:topology[topo:topology-id="pcep-topology"]

Response:

{ "output": { "failure": "failed", "error": [ { "error-object": { "type": 24, "value": 2, "ignore": true, "processing-rule": true } } ] } }

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487529612, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG3XLGHIWTXQ2SQCGWDPS3EOLANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Ok, will be waiting for any help from other members...

Are you also able to help with BGP PCEP Pathman which deploys RSVP tunnels ?

The idea is that we want to migrate to SDN controller for path computation, and... with Pathman-SR we get this error when trying to deploy paths while with BGP PCEP Pathman, we can deploy paths(as I tested directly from ODL controller and RSVP tunnels are created) but we don't see linkstate topology on pathman page:

/pathman/client/pathman/index.html -> don't see anything, it stucks on load... /pathman/client/BGP/index.html -> we see the entire topology...

And in the logs when I open pathman/index.html I have no errors, but when I open BGP/index.html, I get this errors:

16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.372 UTC root:get_url      INFO: Url get Status: 200
16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.373 UTC root:parseNodes   INFO: BGP build node topology
16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.374 UTC root:parseNodes   ERROR: BGP get node error2: list index out of range
16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.374 UTC root:parseNodes   INFO: BGP Nodelist Len: 5
16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.374 UTC root:parseLinks   INFO: BGP compose links
16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.375 UTC root:get          INFO: BGP Nodes: 5
16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.375 UTC root:get          INFO: BGP Links: 8

Should I open an Issue in Pathman project ?

gilesheron commented 5 years ago

Yeah - maybe open an issue with Pathman. Like I say, Niklas might have some idea. Am not sure how “supported” Pathman is these days :(

On 29 Apr 2019, at 12:42, avisnevschi notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Ok, will be waiting for any help from other members...

Are you also able to help with BGP PCEP Pathman which deploys RSVP tunnels ?

The idea is that we want to migrate to SDN controller for path computation, and... with Pathman-SR we get this error when trying to deploy paths while with BGP PCEP Pathman, we can deploy paths(as I tested directly from ODL controller and RSVP tunnels are created) but we don't see linkstate topology on pathman page:

/pathman/client/pathman/index.html -> don't see anything, it stucks on load... /pathman/client/BGP/index.html -> we see the entire topology...

Should I open an Issue in Pathman project ?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-487533483, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJLMG4DCJSRPJT5V6VFH43PS3GIVANCNFSM4HHE4PDA.

nikmon2 commented 5 years ago

I can look at the Pathman error - Can I get access to the setup?

16544 2019-04-29 10:43:48.374 UTC root:parseNodes   ERROR: BGP get node error2: list index out of range

Cheers, Nik

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Of course I can give you access. Please give me any contact details where I can send you all credentials.

nikmon2 commented 5 years ago

please mailto nmontin @ cisco . com

avisnevschi commented 5 years ago

Sent. Thank you very much.

On Wed, 1 May 2019, 23:11 nikmon2, notifications@github.com wrote:

please mailto nmontin @ cisco . com

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/CiscoDevNet/pathman-sr/issues/16#issuecomment-488400923, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AL3HQP3ASSZHCO4XNO6IUATPTH2OHANCNFSM4HHE4PDA .

CiscoDevNet / pathman-sr

Issue trying to deploy a new SR path on Juniper MX #16