cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
6557
Views
0
Helpful
2
Replies

XTC dynamic SR-TE tunnels

benabdam1
Level 1
Level 1

In our lab setup, using all IOS XR routers and an XTC based PCE, we do not understand why all the dynamic SR-TE tunnels calculated by XTC are expressed as SR Adjacency SIDs, never as Node SIDs, hence never taking advantage of all the ECMP paths and resulting in very long SID-lists (a label stack always equal to the number of hops of the tunnel).

Examples found on dcloud labs/demos show PCE calculated path with node-SIDs and/or a combination of Adj-SID and Node-SIDs with the exact same network setup and configuration. Any idea what could be causing this issue?

Just a Note: when configuring explicit SR-TE tunnel with a manually configured SID-list based on Node-SIDs, everything works well.

More info:

The headend, a ASR9001-001 is configured with an TE interface tunnel that request dynmaic SR path calculation to the XTC and the resulting SID-list is a sequence of Adjacency SID in all scenarios (the setup has 10 nodes, 5 of which in the same domain and the other 5 in another domain, but same result). In the cases where the tail-end (egress PE) is for example 7 hops away, the XTC calculated path is 7 Adjacency SIDs

Example of an output:

The tunnel configuration:

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9001-001#show run int tunnel-te 100

Wed Nov 15 12:16:57.695 CET

interface tunnel-te100

description min TE metric tunnel

ipv4 unnumbered Loopback0

destination 10.92.224.105

path-selection

  metric te

!

path-option 1 dynamic pce segment-routing

and the PCE calculated path (6 hops, all Adj-SID when our topology has a few ECMP paths that satisfies the object "minimum TE metric"

(same result with IGP metric):

RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:ASR9001-001#show mpls traffic-eng tunnels 100
Wed Nov 15 12:20:19.981 CET


Name: tunnel-te100  Destination: 10.92.224.105  Ifhandle:0x520
  Signalled-Name: ASR9001-001_t100
  Status:
    Admin:    up Oper:   up   Path:  valid   Signalling: connected

    path option 1, (Segment-Routing) type dynamic pce (Basis for Setup, path weight 230)
    G-PID: 0x0800 (derived from egress interface properties)
    Bandwidth Requested: 0 kbps  CT0
    Creation Time: Thu Nov  2 08:49:44 2017 (1w6d ago)
  Config Parameters:
    Bandwidth:        0 kbps (CT0) Priority:  7  7 Affinity: 0x0/0xffff
    Metric Type: TE (interface)
    Path Selection:
      Tiebreaker: Min-fill (default)
      Protection: any (default)
    Hop-limit: disabled
    Cost-limit: disabled
    Path-invalidation timeout: 10000 msec (default), Action: Tear (default)
    AutoRoute: disabled  LockDown: disabled   Policy class: not set
    Forward class: 0 (default)
    Forwarding-Adjacency: disabled
    Autoroute Destinations: 0
    Loadshare:          0 equal loadshares
    Auto-bw: disabled
    Path Protection: Not Enabled
    BFD Fast Detection: Disabled
    Reoptimization after affinity failure: Enabled
    SRLG discovery: Disabled
  History:
    Tunnel has been up for: 00:08:12 (since Wed Nov 15 12:12:08 CET 2017)
    Current LSP:
      Uptime: 00:08:12 (since Wed Nov 15 12:12:08 CET 2017)
    Reopt. LSP:
      Last Failure:
        LSP not signalled, has no S2Ls
        Date/Time: Wed Nov 15 12:09:28 CET 2017 [00:10:52 ago]
    Prior LSP:
      ID: 34 Path Option: 1
      Removal Trigger: tunnel shutdown

  Segment-Routing Path Info (PCE computed path)
    Segment0[Link]: 10.93.11.1 - 10.93.11.2, Label: 24001
    Segment1[Link]: 10.93.2.13 - 10.93.2.14, Label: 24028
    Segment2[Link]: 10.93.3.10 - 10.93.3.9, Label: 24001
    Segment3[Link]: 10.93.2.17 - 10.93.2.18, Label: 24003
    Segment4[Link]: 10.93.4.5 - 10.93.4.6, Label: 24010
    Segment5[Link]: 10.94.2.1 - 10.94.2.2, Label: 24004
Displayed 1 (of 7) heads, 0 (of 0) midpoints, 0 (of 0) tails
Displayed 1 up, 0 down, 0 recovering, 0 recovered heads

2 Replies 2

keglass
Level 7
Level 7

Mehdi,

Please refer to the following documents for more information:

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/routers/asr9000/software/asr9k-r6-2/segment-routing/configuration/guide/b-segment-…

ASR9000/XR Introduction to Segment Rout... - Cisco Support Community

I also recommend you post this to the Cisco Support Community for more feedback.

Kelli Glass

Moderator for Cisco Customer Communities

benabdam1
Level 1
Level 1

Looks like there is an issue with OSPF in genereal.

I reconfigured the IGP in all the domains with ISIS (instead of OSPF) and the problem was resolved: the PCE is now provided paths with node SIDs using a minimum number of SIDs (instead of Adj-SID for EVERY hop) allowing for ECMP and reducing the label-stack depth.

Is this a known issue with OSPF? 

Getting Started

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: