I was wondering if i can create SVI on ASR9000 ?
We have a metro deployment with L2 rings using REP and ME3400.
We are also considering of buying 2 ASR9000 routers.
For example we want to have a daisy chain of ME3400 interconnected via L2 trunk ports and have this daisy chain connected from one end to one of the ASR9000 and from the second end to the other. The ASRs would be interconnected with 10G dark fiber.
Since the chain is L2 we probably need to run REP over the ASRs to create a ring. Now the question is can ASR have SVI in those vlans ?
it looks like ASR9000 does not support SVIs
what you can do is a virtual circuit between two interfaces / subinterfaces of an ASR 9000 this should allow your connection model.
Hope to help
In IOS-XR 4.0.1 on an ASR 9000 we added support for IRB which provides the ability to route between a bridge group and a routed interface using a BVI. The BVI is a virtual interface within the router that acts like a normal routed interface. A BVI is associated with a single bridge domain and represents the link between the bridging and the routing domains on the router.
will IRB be able to support bridging between different speed intrefaces? For example 1Gige and 10Gige
I am working on a large project and we will use the ASR9000 as a new PE layer and IRB sounds like it will fit our requirement nicely. However for a specific platform that will connect to the ASR9000 there will be a legacy device that will require multiple 1Gige connections and a new model that will have a 10Gige capability.
The legacy and the new devices need to be able to communicate intra-site and therefore if IRB could bridge between diffrerent interface speed but still offer a single L3 next hop (BVI in IRB) that would be very useful.
If not I will just put them on diffrerent subnets and route between to two.
Thanks in advance for any help.
Paul Le Grange
yup you can do that. You can route and bridge between the different speeds.
The BVI solution seems like the perfect way out for you, but just so you know, you can't put QOS on the BVI interface or ACL. Those features have to be applied to the EFP's (l2transport interfaces that you put in your bridge domain).
sr Tech Lead ASR9000
could you please specify what do you meant to say by "Is there BVI support for L3 interfaces in VRF." ?
In the meantime I have this configured and working fine:
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ios(config-if)#do sh run int bvi3
Sat Sep 24 15:24:21.785 CEST
ipv4 address 18.104.22.168 255.255.255.0
I having a problem with the ASR 9ks not supporting SVIs. We have (2) 6509s in a basic configuration. They have a layer 2 link between them with vlan 100 on that link, they each have a SVI on vlan 100 and have hsrp configured. A remote device has 2 interfaces, one to each 6509, on vlan 100 and uses the hsrp address as the default gateway. If we wanted to replace both 6509s with ASR 9010, I don't think we can do the same configured, is there are a way to do that on the ASR 9010?
Yes, you could emulate the same thing on ASR9ks. Simply put, you would build a bridge group and use a BVI as the L3 interface for the bridge grup.
Here is a great document that was put together and might help.
Apologize that my question didn't relate to this topic but I can't reply into "ASR9000/XR: Monitoring CPU and memory" topic. I got error as below on all linecard.
LC/0/4/CPU0:Nov 8 19:00:02.119 GMT_TH: fib_mgr: %PLATFORM-PLAT_FIB-6-INFO : PD FIB object LEAF OOR state changed to YELLOW
LC/0/4/CPU0:Nov 8 19:00:02.120 GMT_TH: fib_mgr: %ROUTING-FIB-4-RSRC_LOW : CEF running low on DATA_TYPE_TABLE_SET resource memory. CEF will nowbegin resource constrained forwarding. Only route deletes will behandled in this state, which may result in mismatch between RIB/CEF.Traffic loss on certain prefixes can be expected. The CEF willautomatically resume normal operation, once the resource utilizationreturns to normal level
LC/0/2/CPU0:Nov 8 19:01:05.906 GMT_TH: fib_mgr: %PLATFORM-PLAT_FIB-6-INFO : PD FIB object LEAF OOR state changed to GREEN
LC/0/2/CPU0:Nov 8 19:01:05.906 GMT_TH: fib_mgr: %ROUTING-FIB-6-RSRC_OK : CEF resource state has returned to normal. CEF hasexited resource constrained operation and normal forwarding has beenrestored
From this error I have problem about some bgp route can't install into routing table which same as "adding route fail" section from troubleshooting guide. From that guide it has workaround by delete some existing route so my question is which prefix should I delete? I tried to delete some route already but it also happen again so what's should I do next?
yeah this topic is a bit unrelated to the question at hand, so next time maybe you can open a new discussion for everyone to see and comment, but any case, it sounds like you are hitting a route scale limit.
Is this trident? If so, you may need to go to an L3 or L3XL profile.
how many routes across all vrf's do you have?
Sorry for late repond and Yes, all the linecard is trident. For the route porefix it's around 490,000 during problem occur. I found your forum on "Understanding Route scale" which make me more clear about this issue. I didn't decide to change the profile yet do you have any recommendation if i am using this ASR9K for IIG and recieve the full route?
for an internet gateway and a full inet routing table I would definitely be at the l3 scale profile.
you probably want to know that you need to reload the linecards for that in order to take effect as the sizing between l2 and l3 is determined/carved at boot time.