FRRouting / frr

The FRRouting Protocol Suite
https://frrouting.org/
Other
3.31k stars 1.25k forks source link

MPLS L3VPN issue to ping from Customer site A to Customer site B using IS-IS routing protocol #9167

Closed DanialJF closed 1 year ago

DanialJF commented 3 years ago

I am using FRR 7.5.1 on Linux VM (Linux 5.10.43-0-virt (x86_64)) kernel: 5.8.0-48-generic running over windows-based GNS3!

Consider me as a new user working with FRRouting! My aim is to implement the MPLS L3VPN and using the IS-IS routing protocol for the IGP. I have added VRF Interface Addition on FRR CLI. Also, I have enabled MPLS processing in container Kernel (/etc/sysctl.conf).

Here, I have attached the schematic of the network and all the config commands. However, I am not able to ping from customer site A to customer site B!

Please advise me!

MPLS_L3VPN_ISIS_submit.docx


Sample config for R2:

frr# show run Building configuration...

Current configuration: ! frr version 7.5.1 frr defaults traditional hostname frr service integrated-vtysh-config ! interface eth0 vrf CUS1 ip address 192.168.10.2/30 link-params enable neighbor 192.168.10.1 as 300 exit-link-params ! interface eth1 ip address 9.9.9.1/30 ip router isis 1 ! interface eth2 ip address 9.9.9.5/30 ip router isis 1 ! interface lo ip address 2.2.2.2/32 ip router isis 1 isis passive ! router bgp 500 bgp router-id 2.2.2.2 bgp log-neighbor-changes neighbor 5.5.5.5 remote-as 500 neighbor 5.5.5.5 update-source lo neighbor 192.168.10.1 remote-as 300 ! address-family ipv4 unicast neighbor 5.5.5.5 next-hop-self exit-address-family ! address-family ipv4 vpn neighbor 5.5.5.5 activate neighbor 5.5.5.5 next-hop-self exit-address-family ! router bgp 500 vrf CUS1 ! address-family ipv4 unicast redistribute connected label vpn export auto rd vpn export 300:1 rt vpn import 400:65 rt vpn export 300:12 export vpn import vpn exit-address-family ! mpls ldp router-id 2.2.2.2 neighbor 3.3.3.3 password test neighbor 4.4.4.4 password test ! address-family ipv4 discovery transport-address 2.2.2.2 ! interface eth1 ! interface eth2 ! interface lo ! exit-address-family ! ! router isis 1 net 49.1111.2222.3333.00 ! line vty


frr# show mpls status MPLS support enabled: Yes


frr# show bgp summary

IPv4 Unicast Summary: BGP router identifier 2.2.2.2, local AS number 500 vrf-id 0 BGP table version 0 RIB entries 0, using 0 bytes of memory Peers 2, using 27 KiB of memory

Neighbor V AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down State/PfxRcd 5.5.5.5 4 500 79 84 0 0 0 01:11:39 0 192.168.10.1 4 300 0 0 0 0 0 never Active

Total number of neighbors 2

IPv4 VPN Summary: BGP router identifier 2.2.2.2, local AS number 500 vrf-id 0 BGP table version 0 RIB entries 3, using 552 bytes of memory Peers 1, using 13 KiB of memory

fxRcd 1

Total number of neighbors 1


frr# show mpls table

Inbound Label Type Nexthop Outbound Label

16 LDP 9.9.9.2 implicit-null 17 LDP 9.9.9.2 implicit-null 18 LDP 9.9.9.6 implicit-null 19 LDP 9.9.9.6 implicit-null 20 LDP 9.9.9.6 18 20 LDP 9.9.9.2 20 80 BGP CUS1 -


frr# show ip route Codes: K - kernel route, C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, O - OSPF, I - IS-IS, B - BGP, E - EIGRP, N - NHRP, T - Table, v - VNC, V - VNC-Direct, A - Babel, D - SHARP, F - PBR, f - OpenFabric,

  • selected route, * - FIB route, q - queued, r - rejected, b - backup

I> 2.2.2.2/32 [115/30] via 9.9.9.9, eth1, label 16, weight 1, 00:34:17 via 9.9.9.13, eth2, label 16, weight 1, 00:34:17 I> 3.3.3.3/32 [115/20] via 9.9.9.9, eth1, label implicit-null, weight 1, 00:35:58 I> 4.4.4.4/32 [115/20] via 9.9.9.13, eth2, label implicit-null, weight 1, 00:34:18 C> 5.5.5.5/32 is directly connected, lo, 00:36:25 I> 9.9.9.0/30 [115/20] via 9.9.9.9, eth1, label implicit-null, weight 1, 00:35:58 I> 9.9.9.4/30 [115/20] via 9.9.9.13, eth2, label implicit-null, weight 1, 00:34:18 I 9.9.9.8/30 [115/20] via 9.9.9.9, eth1 inactive, weight 1, 00:35:58 C> 9.9.9.8/30 is directly connected, eth1, 00:36:26 I 9.9.9.12/30 [115/20] via 9.9.9.13, eth2 inactive, weight 1, 00:34:18 C> 9.9.9.12/30 is directly connected, eth2, 00:36:26

github-actions[bot] commented 1 year ago

This issue is stale because it has been open 180 days with no activity. Comment or remove the autoclose label in order to avoid having this issue closed.

frrbot[bot] commented 1 year ago

This issue will be automatically closed in the specified period unless there is further activity.