10-14-2005 04:12 PM
Should I be able to pass multicast traffic over a L2 MPLS VPN? Any links?
Thanks In Advance!
10-14-2005 05:31 PM
It is certainly possible to pass multicast traffic over L2VPN as anything received from the attachment circuit will be forwarded to the pseudowire and vice versa.
Let me know if I answered your question,
10-14-2005 06:55 PM
Hi h,
Thanks for your help! I'm still having problems. My configs are on gigabit ethernet interfaces. I'm not able to ping end to end. My lab consists of HOST-SWITCH-PE-PE-SWITCH-HOST. The PE hardware and software is identical:
IOS (tm) 7200 Software (C7200-JS-M), Version 12.2(15)T17, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc
PE1#
!
interface GigabitEthernet1/0
description TEST Network
ip address 172.26.1.18 255.255.255.248
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
negotiation auto
tag-switching mtu 1530
tag-switching ip
end
!
interface GigabitEthernet2/0.1
description TESTING_MULTICAST
encapsulation dot1Q 10
no cdp enable
mpls l2transport route 172.26.1.254 10
end
PE1#sh mpls l2transport summary
Destination address: 172.26.1.254, total number of vc: 1
0 unknown, 1 up, 0 down, 0 admin down
1 active vc on MPLS interface Gi1/0
PE1#sh mpls l2transport vc de
Local interface: Gi2/0.1 up, line protocol up, Eth VLAN 10 up
Destination address: 172.26.1.254, VC ID: 10, VC status: up
Tunnel label: imp-null, next hop 172.26.1.17
Output interface: Gi1/0, imposed label stack {16}
Create time: 01:00:23, last status change time: 00:59:07
Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 172.26.1.254:0 up
MPLS VC labels: local 16, remote 16
Group ID: local 3, remote 3
MTU: local 1500, remote 1500
Remote interface description: TESTING_MULTICAST
Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled
VC statistics:
packet totals: receive 0, send 0
byte totals: receive 0, send 0
packet drops: receive 0, send 0
PE1#sh mpls forwarding-table
Local Outgoing Prefix Bytes tag Outgoing Next Hop
tag tag or VC or Tunnel Id switched interface
16 Untagged l2ckt(10) 0 Gi2/0.1 point2point
17 Pop tag 172.26.1.254/32 0 Gi1/0 172.26.1.17
PE2#
interface GigabitEthernet1/0
description TEST Network
ip address 172.26.1.17 255.255.255.248
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
negotiation auto
tag-switching mtu 1530
tag-switching ip
end
!
interface GigabitEthernet2/0.1
description TESTING_MULTICAST
encapsulation dot1Q 10
no cdp enable
mpls l2transport route 172.26.1.253 10
end
PE2#sh mpls l2transport summary
Destination address: 172.26.1.253, total number of vc: 1
0 unknown, 1 up, 0 down, 0 admin down
1 active vc on MPLS interface Gi1/0
PE2#sh mpls l2transport vc de
Local interface: Gi2/0.1 up, line protocol up, Eth VLAN 10 up
Destination address: 172.26.1.253, VC ID: 10, VC status: up
Tunnel label: imp-null, next hop 172.26.1.18
Output interface: Gi1/0, imposed label stack {16}
Create time: 01:02:19, last status change time: 01:01:21
Signaling protocol: LDP, peer 172.26.1.253:0 up
MPLS VC labels: local 16, remote 16
Group ID: local 3, remote 3
MTU: local 1500, remote 1500
Remote interface description: TESTING_MULTICAST
Sequencing: receive disabled, send disabled
VC statistics:
packet totals: receive 0, send 0
byte totals: receive 0, send 0
packet drops: receive 0, send 0
PE2#sh mpls forwarding-table
Local Outgoing Prefix Bytes tag Outgoing Next Hop
tag tag or VC or Tunnel Id switched interface
16 Untagged l2ckt(10) 0 Gi2/0.1 point2point
17 Pop tag 172.26.1.253/32 0 Gi1/0 172.26.1.18
Am I missing anything?
10-15-2005 06:42 AM
The configs and the output from the show commands look good. Are you trying to ping a unicast or multicast address. Could you please post the CE configs and the output from your ping test.
Thanks,
10-16-2005 07:48 AM
Hi H,
Good call! I checked my CE trunks and noted both had my vlan 10 as the native. After the native was changed on both sides the traffic started flowing and the multicast barely affected the router proc in comparison to when i tested the multicast vpn config.
Many Thanks!
11-07-2005 09:25 AM
Hi,
I wonder if that had happened because by default there is no tagging on native VLAN, so PE could not identify the traffic to be forwared via the pseudowire?
David
11-07-2005 08:41 PM
Yes ideally that should have been the issue. If the xconnect had been on the native ethernet , it would have worked right away i assume.
Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: