On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 06:19:10PM +0200, Rolf Sommerhalder wrote:
> Thanks Claudio for your speedy reply.
> 
> > Have a look at the route -n show -mpls output and check the input counter
> for label 20.
> 
> It happily counts and confirms what tcpdump shows on the ingress interface:
> 
> [r...@p2:root]# route -n show -mpls
> Routing tables
> 
> MPLS:
> In label  Out label Op     Gateway            Flags   Refs      Use
> Mtu  Prio Interface
> 3         -         LOCAL  127.0.0.1          UGT        0        0
> 33200    56 lo0
> 16        -         LOCAL  10.7.0.254         UGT        0        0
>  -    56 udav0
> 17        -         POP    1.1.2.1            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr2
> 18        -         POP    1.1.2.1            UGT        0        5
>  -    56 vr2
> 19        19        SWAP   1.1.2.1            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr2
> 20        -         POP    2.2.1.2            UGT        0     7526
>  -    56 vr0   <==
> 21        -         POP    2.2.1.2            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr0
> 22        -         POP    2.2.1.2            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr0
> 23        23        SWAP   1.1.2.1            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr2
> 24        -         LOCAL  7.0.0.2            UGT        0        1
> 33200    56 lo1
> 25        17        SWAP   1.2.3.3            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr1
> 26        26        SWAP   1.1.2.1            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr2
> 27        26        SWAP   2.2.1.2            UGT        0        0
>  -    56 vr0
> 
> Also, I have re-checked the counters of all other routes as well as
> the traffic out of all other interface on this P router, but the
> packets do not appear on a "wrong" interface.
> 

Yeah, the packets are dropped in the POP case of mpls_input.c that's how
far I got until now. I started with a fix but my magic is not strong
enough for now. Need to add some printfs to figure out where the packets
are dropped now.

> > Setup looks fine. I use OSPF as IGP but I now Michele is using RIP in his
> setup.
> 
> For a cross-check, I will move from RIP to OSPF and report again if it
> made any difference.
> 

Does not make a difference I have the same issue.

> > Please consider using IP blocks that are available for testing and not
> publicly assigned ones.
> 
> But it so much more convenient with short addresses which reflect the
> topology, although there is actually named running as well. As a
> precaution against leakage into the wild Internet, I had added those
> public ranges temporarily to the RFC1918 egress filter on my pf lab
> firewall :-)
> 

I just brought it up because of the bad traffic flowing through the newly
assigned 1/8.
I use 10/8 as my playground and 192.168/16 for the VRFs. Works nicely.

-- 
:wq Claudio

Reply via email to