带MPLS设计的思科IOS-XR BGP
目录
简介
本文档介绍在Cisco IOS®-XR中对多协议标签交换(MPLS)和边界网关协议(BGP)的组合具有特殊行为和配置的几个方案。
1. AS间MPLS VPN选项B和C需要静态路由
此图显示AS间选项B设置。
图1.
提供商边缘(PE)路由器PE1具有VRF前缀10.200.1.2/32的路由，但该路由未解析。
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show cef vrf one 10.200.1.2
10.200.1.2/32, version 3, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa140be74) [1], 0x0 (0x0), 0x208 (0xa14a7118)
Updated Apr 7 14:36:45.628
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 3
via 10.3.1.4/32, 0 dependencies, recursive [flags 0x6000]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa0d87468 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop VRF - 'default', table - 0xe0000000
unresolved
labels imposed {24004}
PE1没有10.3.1.4/32的路由。它有10.3.1.0/24的路由。
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show route 10.3.1.4
Routing entry for 10.3.1.0/24
Known via "ospf 1", distance 110, metric 3, type intra area
Installed Apr 7 14:07:01.140 for 00:32:48
Routing Descriptor Blocks
10.1.1.2, from 10.100.1.3, via GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0
Route metric is 3
No advertising protos.
下一跳的自治系统边界路由(ASBR)上必须有静态路由。您必须在每个ASBR上配置此静态路由并将其重分发到内部网关协议(IGP)。
router static
address-family ipv4 unicast
10.3.1.4/32 GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1
!
!
router ospf 1
redistribute static
路由现在已解析。
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show cef vrf one 10.200.1.2
10.200.1.2/32, version 3, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa140be74) [1], 0x0 (0x0), 0x208 (0xa14a7118)
Updated Apr 7 14:36:45.628
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 3
via 10.3.1.4/32, 3 dependencies, recursive [flags 0x6000]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa150f9f4 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop VRF - 'default', table - 0xe0000000
next hop 10.3.1.4/32 via 24005/0/21
next hop 10.1.1.2/32 Gi0/0/0/0 labels imposed {24003 24004}
ASBR1为VPNv4/6前缀安装指向ASBR2的POP传出标签：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls forwarding prefix 10.3.1.4/32
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24005 Pop 10.3.1.4/32 Gi0/0/0/1 10.3.1.4 2506
即使ASBR上的next-hop-self指向iBGP邻居，如果ASBR上未配置静态路由，ASBR之间的标签转发也将中断。
在ASBR1上，使用next-hop-self到PE1，且没有静态路由：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls forwarding labels 24006 detail
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24006 24004 2:2:10.200.1.2/32 10.3.1.4 0
Updated: Apr 7 14:49:58.190
Path Flags: 0x6000 [ ]
Label Stack (Top -> Bottom): { }
MAC/Encaps: 0/0, MTU: 0
Packets Switched: 0
请注意，“传出接口”列上缺少传出接口。ASBR上的静态路由是AS间选项B和C的必需。
2.保留AS间选项B的ASBR上的路由目标
需要命令来确保ASBR存储/保留vpnv4/6路由，然后通告它们。如果没有此命令，则如果ASBR上没有配置本地VRF来导入路由的任何路由目标，或者它不是地址系列vpnv4/6的路由反射器(RR)，则ASBR不存储路由。
router bgp 1
address-family ipv4 unicast
!
address-family vpnv4 unicast
retain route-target all
!
3. ASBR不通告IPv4标记单播地址
AS间选项C或无缝MPLS（统一MPLS）网络需要IPv4标记单播。这是因为vpnv4/6前缀默认标记，但IPv4(IPv6)单播的情况并非如此。如果情况并非如此，则标签交换路径(LSP)端到端中断，流量端到端失败。
请看图2，它显示AS间选项C设置。
图2.
P1和P2路由器也是vpnv4的自治系统(AS)中的路由反射器。
标记单播(LU)用于将环回前缀从一个AS传输到另一个AS。
ASBR1已配置此地址系列，但其中没有路由：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast summary
BGP router identifier 10.100.1.3, local AS number 1
BGP generic scan interval 60 secs
Non-stop routing is enabled
BGP table state: Active
Table ID: 0xe0000000 RD version: 41
BGP main routing table version 41
BGP NSR Initial initsync version 2 (Reached)
BGP NSR/ISSU Sync-Group versions 0/0
BGP scan interval 60 secs
BGP is operating in STANDALONE mode.
Process RcvTblVer bRIB/RIB LabelVer ImportVer SendTblVer StandbyVer
Speaker 41 41 41 41 41 0
Neighbor Spk AS MsgRcvd MsgSent TblVer InQ OutQ Up/Down St/PfxRcd
10.3.1.4 0 2 150 151 41 0 0 00:06:29 0
10.100.1.2 0 1 52 52 41 0 0 00:06:42 0
原因是ASBR必须具有以下命令，以便为每条路由分配多协议标签交换(MPLS)标签，然后通告路由。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show run router bgp
router bgp 1
address-family ipv4 unicast
redistribute ospf 1
allocate-label all
!
此命令的结果是：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast
BGP router identifier 10.100.1.3, local AS number 1
BGP generic scan interval 60 secs
Non-stop routing is enabled
BGP table state: Active
Table ID: 0xe0000000 RD version: 52
BGP main routing table version 52
BGP NSR Initial initsync version 2 (Reached)
BGP NSR/ISSU Sync-Group versions 0/0
BGP scan interval 60 secs
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best
i - internal, r RIB-failure, S stale, N Nexthop-discard
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
*> 10.1.1.0/24 10.1.2.2 2 32768 ?
*> 10.1.2.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 ?
*> 10.2.1.0/24 10.3.1.4 0 0 2 ?
*> 10.2.2.0/24 10.3.1.4 2 0 2 ?
*> 10.3.1.0/24 0.0.0.0 0 32768 ?
* 10.3.1.4 0 0 2 ?
*> 10.100.1.1/32 10.1.2.2 3 32768 ?
*> 10.100.1.2/32 10.1.2.2 2 32768 ?
*> 10.100.1.3/32 0.0.0.0 0 32768 ?
*> 10.100.1.4/32 10.3.1.4 0 0 2 ?
*> 10.100.1.5/32 10.3.1.4 2 0 2 ?
*> 10.100.1.6/32 10.3.1.4 3 0 2 ?
Processed 11 prefixes, 12 paths
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast 10.100.1.6/32
BGP routing table entry for 10.100.1.6/32
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 48 48
Local Label: 24008
Last Modified: Apr 7 16:20:04.509 for 00:00:49
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.2
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.2
2
10.3.1.4 from 10.3.1.4 (10.100.1.4)
Received Label 24002
Origin incomplete, metric 3, localpref 100, valid, external, best, group-best
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 48
Origin-AS validity: not-found
简而言之：
- 必须配置标签分配（在所有ASBR和PE路由器上）
- 必须为BGP邻居配置地址系列ipv4 labeled-unicast
4. eBGP-eBGP（背对背eBGP）Vpnv4需要虚拟iBGP邻居
看图3。
图3.
一连有三个ASBR。ASBR3将eBGP vpnv4单播运行到ASBR1和ASBR2。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR3#show bgp vpnv4 unicast
BGP router identifier 10.100.1.7, local AS number 3
BGP generic scan interval 60 secs
Non-stop routing is enabled
BGP table state: Active
Table ID: 0x0 RD version: 0
BGP main routing table version 3
BGP NSR Initial initsync version 2 (Reached)
BGP NSR/ISSU Sync-Group versions 0/0
BGP scan interval 60 secs
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best
i - internal, r RIB-failure, S stale, N Nexthop-discard
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
Network Next Hop Metric LocPrf Weight Path
Route Distinguisher: 1:1
*> 10.200.1.1/32 10.4.1.3 0 1 ?
Route Distinguisher: 2:2
*> 10.200.1.2/32 10.4.2.4 0 2 ?
Processed 2 prefixes, 2 paths
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR3#show bgp vpnv4 unicast rd 1:1 10.200.1.1/32
BGP routing table entry for 10.200.1.1/32, Route Distinguisher: 1:1
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 2 2
Last Modified: Apr 7 18:45:21.510 for 00:03:30
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Not advertised to any peer
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
1
10.4.1.3 from 10.4.1.3 (10.100.1.3)
Received Label 24009
Origin incomplete, localpref 100, valid, external, best, group-best, import-candidate, not-in-vrf
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 2
Extended community: RT:1:1
从ASBR3通告vpnv4路由时存在问题：ASBR3不向外部vpnv4路由通告。
解决方案是在ASBR3上配置虚拟iBGP邻居并启用next-hop-self:虚拟iBGP邻居不需要启动。
router bgp 3
address-family vpnv4 unicast
retain route-target all
!
neighbor 10.4.1.3
remote-as 1 address-family vpnv4 unicast
route-policy PASS in
route-policy PASS out
!
!
neighbor 10.4.2.4
remote-as 2
address-family vpnv4 unicast
route-policy PASS in
route-policy PASS out
!
!
neighbor 10.99.99.99
remote-as 3
description dummy-iBGP neighbor for back-to-back eBGP vpnv4
update-source Loopback0
address-family vpnv4 unicast
next-hop-self
!
!
!
结果是，vpnv4路由现在被通告：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR3#show bgp vpnv4 unicast rd 1:1 10.200.1.1/32
BGP routing table entry for 10.200.1.1/32, Route Distinguisher: 1:1
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 12 12
Local Label: 24002
Last Modified: Apr 7 18:58:04.510 for 00:01:46
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.2
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.2
1
10.4.1.3 from 10.4.1.3 (10.100.1.3)
Received Label 24009
Origin incomplete, localpref 100, valid, external, best, group-best, import-candidate, not-in-vrf
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 12
Extended community: RT:1:1
5. AS间选项C - BGP标签优先于LDP标签
请参阅此映像，查看通过多条链路连接的两个ASBR的设置。为了实现此目的，ASBR之间的eBGP ipv4 LU会话必须是多跳，因为它们之间有并行链路。
图4.
这是AS间选项C。路由器P1和P2也是vpnv4的路由反射器。
PE路由器和ASBR之间有标记为单播的IPv4。ASBR通过多条链路直接连接。
在ASBR上，您会看到：
router bgp 1
…
neighbor 10.100.1.4
remote-as 2
ebgp-multihop 2
update-source Loopback0
address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
route-policy PASS in
route-policy PASS out
ASBR之间不需要标签分发协议(LDP)。BGP将负责ASBR之间链路上的MPLS转发。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls interfaces
Interface LDP Tunnel Static Enabled
-------------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0 Yes No No Yes
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1 No No No Yes
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2 No No No Yes
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/3 No No No Yes
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/4 No No No Yes
到目前为止还不错。问题出在本图所示的场景。
图5.
这是AS间选项C。路由器P1和P2也是vpnv4的路由反射器。
PE路由器和ASBR之间有标记为单播的IPv4。ASBR1和ASBR2未直接连接。它们通过运行IGP和LDP的网络连接多跳。在映像5中，此中间网络由路由器ASBR3表示，该路由器运行IGP和LDP，ASBR1和ASBR2。
在ASBR上使用eBGP多跳时，出现问题。每个AS中RR之间的BGP会话甚至不会启动。
RP/0/0/CPU0:P1#show cef 10.100.1.5
10.100.1.5/32, version 263, internal 0x1000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa13bde74) [1], 0x0 (0xa1389560), 0xa28 (0xa14a72a8)
Updated Apr 8 09:38:02.551
local adjacency 10.1.2.3
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 3
via 10.1.2.3/32, GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1, 5 dependencies, weight 0, class 0 [flags 0x0]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa0e8b2a4 0x0]
next hop 10.1.2.3/32
local adjacency
local label 24004 labels imposed {24007}
为了从P1、AS 1中的RR到P2,AS 2中的RR，传出标签为24007。在ASBR1上，此标签与标签24000交换。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls forwarding labels 24007
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24007 24000 10.100.1.5/32 10.100.1.4 1404
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.5
10.100.1.5/32, version 155, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa13be174) [1], 0x0 (0xa138965c), 0xa08 (0xa14a72d0)
Updated Apr 8 10:02:38.101
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.100.1.4/32, 5 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext [flags 0x6020]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa150f874 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop 10.100.1.4/32 via 24004/0/21
local label 24007
next hop 10.4.1.7/32 Gi0/0/0/4 labels imposed {ImplNull 24000}
标签24000是BGP LU从ASBR2在ASBR1上收到的标签。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast 10.100.1.5
BGP routing table entry for 10.100.1.5/32
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 76 76
Local Label: 24007
Last Modified: Apr 8 09:37:57.509 for 00:04:05
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.3
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.1 10.100.1.2
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.3
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.1 10.100.1.2
2
10.100.1.4 from 10.100.1.4 (10.100.1.4)
Received Label 24000
Origin incomplete, metric 2, localpref 100, valid, external, best, group-best
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 76
Origin-AS validity: not-found
但是，中间的ASBR路由器不运行BGP，因此无法转发它接收的带有此标签的数据包，因为它未分配标签24000。应用于将数据包发送到10.100.1.5的标签是LDP的标签：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show route 10.100.1.5/32
Routing entry for 10.100.1.5/32
Known via "bgp 1", distance 20, metric 2, [ei]-bgp, labeled unicast (3107)
Tag 2, type external
Installed Apr 8 10:02:38.082 for 01:24:37
Routing Descriptor Blocks
10.100.1.4, from 10.100.1.4, BGP external
Route metric is 2
No advertising protos.
这会循环到下一跳10.100.1.4，即ASBR2的环回。
应使用LDP从ASBR3接收的标签，但不应使用。
添加的标签堆栈是{ImplNull 24000}，而不是{24002 24000}。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls ldp bindings 10.100.1.4/32
10.100.1.4/32, rev 146
Local binding: label: 24004
Remote bindings: (2 peers)
Peer Label
----------------- ---------
10.100.1.2:0 24003
10.100.1.7:0 24002
ASBR1应该将从ASBR3路由器收到的LDP标签24002加上。要禁用BGP MPLS转发，请将mpls关键字添加到eBGP multi-hop命令。
ASBR1:
router bgp 1
…
neighbor 10.100.1.4
remote-as 2
ebgp-multihop 2 mpls
update-source Loopback0
address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
route-policy PASS in
route-policy PASS out
!
ASBR1现在有正确的标签重写：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.5
10.100.1.5/32, version 155, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa13be174) [1], 0x0 (0xa138965c), 0xa08 (0xa14a72d0)
Updated Apr 8 10:02:38.102
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.100.1.4/32, 5 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext [flags 0x6020]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa150f874 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop 10.100.1.4/32 via 24004/0/21
local label 24007
next hop 10.4.1.7/32 Gi0/0/0/4 labels imposed {24002 24000}
从命令参考：
在ebgp-multihop命令中使用mpls选项可防止BGP在对等接口上启用MPLS，还可防止为从对等体获取的下一跳地址分配隐式 — NULL重写标签。在MPLS将标签转发到下一代的某些场景中，这非常有用，因为MPLS已通过BGP标记单播或LDP获知了标签。
换句话说，在IOS-XR中，当BGP提供将标签分配给LFIB时，它将优先于LDP。ASBR路由器之间具有多跳的AS间选项C的场景就是这样的场景。
6. AS间选项B - BGP标签优先于LDP标签
图6.
这是AS间选项B。但是，两个ASBR之间有多个并行链路。ASBR之间有RFC3107（交换IPv4路由和MPLS标签），而不是使用IGP和LDP。
要在ASBR1和ASBR2的环回接口之间启用eBGP多跳会话，两个ASBR之间需要eBGP LU。ASBR之间有两条链路，因此需要两个eBGP LU会话。地址系列IPv4需要allocate-label命令。
router bgp 65001
address-family ipv4 unicast
network 10.100.1.3/32
allocate-label all
!
neighbor 10.3.1.4
remote-as 65002
address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
route-policy pass in
route-policy pass out
!
!
neighbor 10.3.2.4
remote-as 65002
address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
route-policy pass in
route-policy pass out
!
!
第1部分的静态路由仍然需要：
router static
address-family ipv4 unicast
10.3.1.4/32 GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1
10.3.2.4/32 GigabitEthernet0/0/0/2
!
!
ASBR之间的eBGP vpnv4会话：
router bgp 65001
address-family ipv4 unicast
network 10.100.1.3/32
allocate-label all
!
address-family vpnv4 unicast
retain route-target all
!
neighbor 10.100.1.4
remote-as 65002
ebgp-multihop 255
update-source Loopback0
address-family vpnv4 unicast
route-policy pass in
route-policy pass out
!
!
请注意，此处不需要mpls关键字，如第5部分所示。此外，如果为iBGP vpnv4会话配置了next-hop-self，则不需要PE和ASBR之间的iBGP LU会话。ASBR2通告的10.100.1.4/32标签为标签3:
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast 10.100.1.4/32
Fri Jun 2 11:50:16.178 UTC
BGP routing table entry for 10.100.1.4/32
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 8 8
Local Label: 24005
Last Modified: Jun 2 11:48:39.920 for 00:01:36
Paths: (4 available, best #1)
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.3
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.7
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.3
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.7
65002
10.3.1.4 from 10.3.1.4 (10.100.1.4)
Received Label 3
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, best, group-best
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 8
Origin-AS validity: not-found
Path #2: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65002
10.3.2.4 from 10.3.2.4 (10.100.1.4)
Received Label 3
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0
Origin-AS validity: not-found
Path #3: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65003 65002
10.3.3.9 from 10.3.3.9 (10.100.1.9)
Received Label 24001
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external, group-best
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0
Origin-AS validity: not-found
Path #4: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65003 65002
10.3.4.9 from 10.3.4.9 (10.100.1.9)
Received Label 24001
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0
Origin-AS validity: not-found
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.4
Fri Jun 2 11:51:06.994 UTC
10.100.1.4/32, version 254, internal 0x1000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa13be474) [1], 0x0 (0xa13896ec), 0xa20 (0xa14a70f0)
Updated Jun 2 11:48:39.634
local adjacency 10.3.1.4
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.3.1.4/32, GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1, 5 dependencies, weight 0, class 0 [flags 0x0]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa0e8b1fc 0xa0e8b34c]
next hop 10.3.1.4/32
local adjacency
local label 24005 labels imposed {ImplNull}
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls forwarding labels 24005
Fri Jun 2 11:51:20.204 UTC
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24005 Pop 10.100.1.4/32 Gi0/0/0/1 10.3.1.4 610
当ASBR之间有另一条路径，且该路径使用IGP + LDP或MPLS TE时，eBGP multihop命令需要mpls关键字。
图7.
ASBR1上面向P3的BGP路由策略用于将权重设置得非常高，因此来自P3的前缀优先于来自ASBR2的前缀。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast 10.100.1.4/32
Fri Jun 2 11:57:23.789 UTC
BGP routing table entry for 10.100.1.4/32
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 9 9
Local Label: 24005
Last Modified: Jun 2 11:51:58.920 for 00:05:24
Paths: (4 available, best #3)
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.3
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.7
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65002
10.3.1.4 from 10.3.1.4 (10.100.1.4)
Received Label 3
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external, group-best
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0
Origin-AS validity: not-found
Path #2: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65002
10.3.2.4 from 10.3.2.4 (10.100.1.4)
Received Label 3
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, external
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0
Origin-AS validity: not-found
Path #3: Received by speaker 0
Advertised to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.3
Advertised to peers (in unique update groups):
10.100.1.7
65003 65002
10.3.3.9 from 10.3.3.9 (10.100.1.9)
Received Label 24001
Origin IGP, localpref 100, weight 65535, valid, external, best, group-best
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 9
Origin-AS validity: not-found
Path #4: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65003 65002
10.3.4.9 from 10.3.4.9 (10.100.1.9)
Received Label 24001
Origin IGP, localpref 100, valid, external
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 0, version 0
Origin-AS validity: not-found
ASBR1现在应将标签24001用作10.100.1.4/32的传出标签。它不：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.4
Fri Jun 2 11:59:46.519 UTC
10.100.1.4/32, version 255, internal 0x1000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa13be474) [1], 0x0 (0xa13896ec), 0xa20 (0xa14a7140)
Updated Jun 2 11:51:58.741
local adjacency 10.3.3.9
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.3.3.9/32, GigabitEthernet0/0/0/3, 7 dependencies, weight 0, class 0 [flags 0x0]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa0e8b544 0xa0e8b5ec]
next hop 10.3.3.9/32
local adjacency
local label 24005 labels imposed {ImplNull}
解决方案与第5部分相同：对eBGP multihop命令使用mpls关键字。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1# conf t
Fri Jun 2 13:56:45.618 UTC
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1(config)#router bgp 65001
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1(config-bgp)# neighbor 10.100.1.4
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1(config-bgp-nbr)#ebgp-multihop 255 mpls
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1(config-bgp-nbr)#commit
ASBR1现在将标签24001用作10.100.1.4/32的传出标签。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.4
Fri Jun 2 13:58:13.402 UTC
10.100.1.4/32, version 200, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa13be474) [1], 0x0 (0xa13895cc), 0xa08 (0xa14a71b8)
Updated Jun 2 13:56:59.378
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 15
via 10.3.3.9/32, 3 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext [flags 0x6020]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa15102f4 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop 10.3.3.9/32 via 24014/0/21
local label 24005
next hop 10.3.3.9/32 Gi0/0/0/3 labels imposed {ImplNull 24001}
ASBR1推送此额外标签。从PE1到PE2的虚拟路由和转发(VRF)中的traceroute显示推送的额外标签。
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#trace vrf one 10.99.1.2
Fri Jun 2 13:49:38.959 UTC
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.99.1.2
1 10.1.1.5 [MPLS: Labels 24002/24012 Exp 0] 29 msec 39 msec 39 msec
2 10.1.2.3 [MPLS: Label 24012 Exp 0] 29 msec 29 msec 39 msec
3 10.3.1.4 [MPLS: Label 24007 Exp 0] 39 msec 39 msec 39 msec
4 10.2.1.6 [MPLS: Labels 24001/24005 Exp 0] 39 msec 39 msec 29 msec
5 10.2.2.2 39 msec * 239 msec
ASBR1和P3之间使用IGP和LDP，ASBR2和P3之间使用MPLS流量工程(TE)时，同样的问题和解决方案也存在。
从ASBR1到P3没有LDP，但有MPLS TE。
在eBGP multihop命令上不使用mpls关键字时，同样的问题再次出现：
转发到10.100.1.4的数据包不会推送BGP LU标签24000。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.4
Tue Jun 6 10:36:56.528 UTC
10.100.1.4/32, version 50, internal 0x1000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa12cc1fc) [1], 0x0 (0xa12b18c0), 0xa20 (0xa14a7258)
Updated Jun 6 10:36:32.930
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.3.3.9/32, tunnel-te1, 7 dependencies, weight 0, class 0 [flags 0x0]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa15d58f8 0xa15d5840]
next hop 10.3.3.9/32
local adjacency
local label 24012 labels imposed {ImplNull}
而使用mpls关键字时，标签24000存在：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show cef 10.100.1.4
Tue Jun 6 10:36:03.241 UTC
10.100.1.4/32, version 34, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa12cc1fc) [1], 0x0 (0xa12b15a8), 0xa08 (0xa14a70f0)
Updated Jun 6 09:39:24.56
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 15
Extensions: context-label:24012
via 10.3.3.9/32, 3 dependencies, recursive, bgp-ext [flags 0x6020]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa150fecc 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop 10.3.3.9/32 via 24011/0/21
local label 24012
next hop 10.3.3.9/32 tt1 labels imposed {ImplNull 24000}
使用mpls关键字，重写如下所示：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls forwarding labels 24012
Tue Jun 6 10:43:50.559 UTC
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24012 24000 10.100.1.4/32 tt1 10.3.3.9 0
如果没有mpls关键字，重写将如下所示：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ASBR1#show mpls forwarding labels 24012
Tue Jun 6 10:45:08.734 UTC
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24012 Pop 10.100.1.4/32 tt1 10.3.3.9 0
此标签14012不用于从VRF到VRF或从PE到PE的流量，但如果遇到，它可能表示标签转发实例库(LFIB)条目是或错误。
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1# trace vrf one 10.99.1.2
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.99.1.2
1 10.1.1.5 [MPLS: Labels 24001/24015 Exp 0] 129 msec 229 msec 129 msec
2 10.1.2.3 [MPLS: Label 24015 Exp 0] 219 msec 439 msec 349 msec
3 10.3.3.9 [MPLS: Labels 24000/24011 Exp 0] 169 msec 249 msec 139 msec
4 10.3.5.4 [MPLS: Label 24011 Exp 0] 89 msec 129 msec 109 msec
5 10.2.1.6 [MPLS: Labels 24004/24008 Exp 0] 139 msec 99 msec 139 msec
6 10.2.2.2 129 msec * 219 msec
在eBGP multihop命令上切换关键字mpls可能导致BGP标签冲突的系统日志消息：
bgp[1051]: %ROUTING-BGP-4-LABEL_COLLISION : Label 24012 collision: prev: [T: 3 RD:0:0:0 PFX/NHID:10.100.1.4/32] curr: [T: 13 RD:0:0:0 PFX/NHID:10.100.1.4/32]
此消息用于本地标签24012。
检查是为了确保BGP拥有的活动标签不会被BGP再次分配用于其他任何内容。此检查仅用于每前缀标签。
此消息是症状，不是本文任何问题的原因。
7.基于VPN（或6PE或EVPN）底层的多跳BGP会话
如果存在eBGP多跳会话，则无法通过vpnv4/6或6PE(IPv6 over MPLS)或以太网虚拟专用网络(EVPN)路由获取下一跳地址的路由，除非路由器具有Cisco IOS®-XR 6.3.2或更高版本。请参阅此映像。
图8.
可能的故障场景：
- 从PE1（在VRF内）到PE2（在VRF内）的eBGP多跳会话
- 从PE1（在VRF内）到CE2的eBGP多跳会话
这适用：
eBGP多跳会话在PE路由器的路由器BGP下的VRF部分下配置。
eBGP多跳会话(从PE1（在VRF内）到PE2（在VRF内），或eBGP多跳会话从PE1（在VRF内）到CE2，仅从Cisco IOS®-XR 6.3.2开始受支持。
eBGP对等体地址可通过包含vnpv4的底层访问。vpnv6、6PE或EVPN。
在6.3.2之前的Cisco IOS®版本中，eBGP会话将处于空闲状态。
例如，配置了VRF1中eBGP多跳会话PE1到PE2。
PE1上从PE1到PE2的eBGP多跳会话的相关配置：
interface Loopback100
vrf one
ipv4 address 10.2.100.1 255.255.255.255
router bgp 1
address-family vpnv4 unicast
!
neighbor 10.100.1.2
remote-as 1
update-source Loopback0
address-family vpnv4 unicast
!
!
vrf one
rd 1:1
address-family ipv4 unicast
redistribute connected
!
neighbor 10.2.100.2
remote-as 65002
ebgp-multihop 255
local-as 65001
update-source Loopback100
address-family ipv4 unicast
route-policy pass in
route-policy pass out
!
!
!
!
eBGP会话保持空闲：
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#show bgp vrf one neighbors
BGP neighbor is 10.2.100.2, vrf one
Remote AS 65002, local AS 65001, external link
Remote router ID 0.0.0.0
BGP state = Idle (No route to multi-hop neighbor)
eBGP对等体地址的路由存在于VRF 1路由表中：
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1# show route vrf one
Codes: C - connected, S - static, R - RIP, B - BGP, (>) - Diversion path
D - EIGRP, EX - EIGRP external, O - OSPF, IA - OSPF inter area
N1 - OSPF NSSA external type 1, N2 - OSPF NSSA external type 2
E1 - OSPF external type 1, E2 - OSPF external type 2, E - EGP
i - ISIS, L1 - IS-IS level-1, L2 - IS-IS level-2
ia - IS-IS inter area, su - IS-IS summary null, * - candidate default
U - per-user static route, o - ODR, L - local, G - DAGR
A - access/subscriber, a - Application route, (!) - FRR Backup path
Gateway of last resort is not set
L 10.2.100.1/32 is directly connected, 00:23:25, Loopback100
B 10.2.100.2/32 [200/0] via 10.100.1.2 (nexthop in vrf default), 00:19:28
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1# show route vrf one 10.2.100.2/32
Routing entry for 10.2.100.2/32
Known via "bgp 1", distance 200, metric 0, type internal
Installed May 29 09:07:53.368 for 00:19:36
Routing Descriptor Blocks
10.100.1.2, from 10.100.1.2
Nexthop in Vrf: "default", Table: "default", IPv4 Unicast, Table Id: 0xe0000000
Route metric is 0
No advertising protos.
问题的根本原因是对等地址的路由是导入的路由：
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1# show bgp vpnv4 unicast vrf one 10.2.100.2/32
BGP routing table entry for 10.2.100.2/32, Route Distinguisher: 1:1
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 7 7
Last Modified: May 29 09:07:53.524 for 00:21:20
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Not advertised to any peer
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
Local
10.100.1.2 (metric 2) from 10.100.1.2 (10.100.1.2)
Received Label 16001
Origin incomplete, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, best, group-best, import-candidate, imported
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 7
Extended community: RT:1:1
Source VRF: one, Source Route Distinguisher: 1:1
在Cisco IOS®-XR 6.3.2之后支持此功能。
8.将BGP重分发到LDP
这是统一或无缝MPLS的特点，以及它如何配置IOS-XR:Unified MPLS和IOS-XR
使用常规统一MPLS时，所有PE和ABR路由器之间都有BGP LU，如图所示。
图9.
图10.
在本例中，有一个没有BGP LU的IGP区域/级别。在左侧，汇聚区域实际上是开放最短路径优先(OSPF)进程1，该进程在核心中没有与OSPF进程2的重分发。在使用OSPF 1的网络部分，PE和区域边界路由器(ABR)路由器之间没有BGP LU。
图11.
BGP LU前缀重分发到ABR1上的IGP OSPF 1，如图所示。
图12.
您需要BGP为收到的iBGP LU前缀分配标签。但是，LDP不会在标签绑定中为重分发的前缀自动通告此标签。默认情况下，IOS(-XE)会执行此操作。
请注意，ABR正在将内部BGP路由重分发到左侧区域的IGP中。这意味着路由器bgp下需要bgp redistribute-internal命令。
router bgp 1
bgp redistribute-internal
router ospf 1
router-id 10.100.1.3
redistribute bgp 1 metric 10 route-policy select-to-allocate
area 0
interface Loopback0
!
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0
network point-to-point
!
!
!
route-policy select-to-allocate
if destination in (10.100.1.7/32) then
pass
else
drop
endif
end-policy
当启用本地标签分配时，ABR将本地标签分配给收到的iBGP LU路由。
router bgp 1
bgp redistribute-internal
ibgp policy out enforce-modifications
address-family ipv4 unicast
redistribute ospf 1 metric 10 route-policy ospf-1-loopbacks-PE
allocate-label route-policy select-to-allocate
路由策略选择分配可用于指定为哪些收到的BGP LU前缀分配了本地标签。
route-policy select-to-allocate
if destination in (10.100.1.7/32) then
pass
else
drop
endif
end-policy
!
PE2的环回前缀在ABR1上显示，带有本地标签，但LDP没有看到此本地标签：
RP/0/0/CPU0:ABR1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast 10.100.1.7/32
BGP routing table entry for 10.100.1.7/32
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 6 6
Local Label: 24006
Last Modified: Sep 5 06:55:47.368 for 06:40:23
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Advertised IPv4 Labeled-unicast paths to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.2
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Advertised IPv4 Labeled-unicast paths to update-groups (with more than one peer):
0.2
Local, (Received from a RR-client)
10.100.1.5 (metric 20) from 10.100.1.5 (10.100.1.7)
Received Label 24003
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, best, group-best, labeled-unicast
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 6
Originator: 10.100.1.7, Cluster list: 10.100.1.5
RP/0/0/CPU0:ABR1#show mpls ldp bindings 10.100.1.7/32
10.100.1.7/32, rev 0 (no route)
No local binding
Remote bindings: (1 peers)
Peer Label
----------------- ---------
10.100.1.2:0 18
这意味着从PE1到PE2的LSP被中断：
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#traceroute 10.100.1.7 source 10.100.1.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.100.1.7
1 10.1.1.2 [MPLS: Label 18 Exp 0] 9 msec 0 msec 0 msec
2 10.1.2.3 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec <<< no MPLS labels
3 10.1.3.4 [MPLS: Labels 16/24003 Exp 0] 29 msec 19 msec 29 msec
4 10.1.4.5 [MPLS: Label 24003 Exp 0] 9 msec 9 msec 9 msec
5 * * *
6 10.1.6.7 9 msec * 19 msec
LSP在P2中断，因为它未从ABR1通过LDP获取远程标签。ABR1在LDP中没有本地分配的前缀10.100.1.7/32标签。
在ABR上需要配置，以将BGP重分发到IGP的路由器上的BGP重分发到LDP。
ABR1不向P2路由器通告前缀10.100.1.7/32的LDP标签绑定。
为使ABR1通告重分发的iBGP前缀的LDP标签绑定，ABR1必须具有以下配置（必须配置AS编号）。
mpls ldp
mldp
address-family ipv4
!
!
router-id 10.100.1.3
address-family ipv4
redistribute
bgp
as 1
!
!
!
您可以让LDP过滤通告。例如，可以配置如下过滤器：
mpls ldp
mldp
address-family ipv4
!
!
router-id 10.100.1.3
address-family ipv4
redistribute
bgp
as 1
advertise-to 1
!
ipv4 access-list 1
10 permit ipv4 host 10.100.1.2 any
在访问列表中指定LDP路由器ID。
在本例中，ABR仅将重分发的iBGP路由的LDP绑定通告给LDP邻居P2（而不是P1），因为10.100.1.2是P2的LDP路由器ID。
从PE1到PE2的LSP现在不中断：
RP/0/0/CPU0:PE1#traceroute 10.100.1.7 source 10.100.1.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.100.1.7
1 10.1.1.2 [MPLS: Label 20 Exp 0] 39 msec 49 msec 29 msec
2 10.1.2.3 [MPLS: Label 24006 Exp 0] 29 msec 49 msec 39 msec
3 10.1.3.4 [MPLS: Labels 16/24003 Exp 0] 29 msec 19 msec 29 msec
4 10.1.4.5 [MPLS: Label 24003 Exp 0] 29 msec 19 msec 29 msec
5 * * *
6 10.1.6.7 19 msec * 19 msec
图13.
LDP通告到左汇聚区域的BGP分配标签(24006)现在用于从PE1到PE2的流量。
请注意，左侧聚合区域仅使用一个MPLS标签。如果这是常规统一MPLS，将使用两个标签。
此时，您无法过滤将哪些重分发的LU iBGP路由过滤到LDP中，接收本地标签，哪些则不过滤。一旦启用将iBGP LU路由重分发到LDP，它们都会获得本地标签。
PE2还在BGP LU中通告前缀10.100.1.99/32。此前缀不会由ABR1重分发到OSPF 1。但是，一旦打开iBGP LU路由到LDP的重分发，前缀10.100.1.99/32也会获得本地标签。
RP/0/0/CPU0:ABR1#show mpls ldp bindings 10.100.1.99/32
10.100.1.99/32, rev 24
Local binding: label: 24007
No remote bindings
9. MPLS激活接口命令
示例1. IGP但无LDP
如果有IGP负责内部路由，但没有LDP可通告标签绑定，则需要mpls activate命令。如果每一跳都运行BGP，则BGP LU可用于通告前缀和标签。当链路上的iBGP时，该链路需要在路由器BGP下使用命令mpls activate启用。请参阅此映像。
图14.
R1和R2在它们之间运行IGP和iBGP LU。R1和R2直接相连。R2有到R3的eBGP LU会话。
R3通过eBGP LU会话将前缀10.100.100.3/2通告给R2。R2通过iBGP LU会话将此前缀通告给R1。
目标是使从R1到R3的LSP不中断。它是否存在？
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#trace 10.100.100.3 so 10.100.100.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.100.100.3
1 100.1.1 !N * !N
第一跳没有此前缀的标签。
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#traceroute mpls ipv4 10.100.100.3/32 ttl 5
Tracing MPLS Label Switched Path to 10.100.100.3/32, timeout is 2 seconds
Codes: '!' - success, 'Q' - request not sent, '.' - timeout,
'L' - labeled output interface, 'B' - unlabeled output interface,
'D' - DS Map mismatch, 'F' - no FEC mapping, 'f' - FEC mismatch,
'M' - malformed request, 'm' - unsupported tlvs, 'N' - no rx label,
'P' - no rx intf label prot, 'p' - premature termination of LSP,
'R' - transit router, 'I' - unknown upstream index,
'X' - unknown return code, 'x' - return code 0
Type escape sequence to abort.
0 0.0.0.0 MRU 0 [No Label]
Q 1 *
所以，没有标签。这并不奇怪，因为MPLS未在到R2的接口上启用：
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#show mpls interfaces
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#
但R3通告的LU前缀在R1上存在：
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#show bgp ipv4 labeled-unicast 10.100.100.3/32
BGP routing table entry for 10.100.100.3/32
Versions:
Process bRIB/RIB SendTblVer
Speaker 7 7
Local Label: 24001
Last Modified: Sep 13 14:27:17.510 for 00:11:39
Paths: (1 available, best #1)
Not advertised to any peer
Path #1: Received by speaker 0
Not advertised to any peer
65001
10.100.1.2 (metric 2) from 10.100.1.2 (10.100.1.2)
Received Label 24002
Origin IGP, metric 0, localpref 100, valid, internal, best, group-best, labeled-unicast
Received Path ID 0, Local Path ID 1, version 7
您在R1上为到R2的接口配置mpls active命令：
router bgp 65000
mpls activate
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0
!
address-family ipv4 unicast
network 10.100.100.1/32
allocate-label all
!
neighbor 10.100.1.2
remote-as 65000
update-source Loopback0
address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
!
!
!
MPLS现在在传出接口上启用。
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#show mpls interfaces
Interface LDP Tunnel Static Enabled
-------------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0 No No No Yes
traceroute现在显示LSP不中断。
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#trace 10.100.100.3 so 10.100.100.1
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.100.100.3
1 10.1.2.2 [MPLS: Label 24002 Exp 0] 39 msec 9 msec 9 msec
2 10.2.3.3 19 msec * 9 msec
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#traceroute mpls ipv4 10.100.100.3/32 ttl 5 source 10.100.100.1
Tracing MPLS Label Switched Path to 10.100.100.3/32, timeout is 2 seconds
Codes: '!' - success, 'Q' - request not sent, '.' - timeout,
'L' - labeled output interface, 'B' - unlabeled output interface,
'D' - DS Map mismatch, 'F' - no FEC mapping, 'f' - FEC mismatch,
'M' - malformed request, 'm' - unsupported tlvs, 'N' - no rx labl,
'P' - no rx intf label prot, 'p' - premature termination of LSP,
'R' - transit router, 'I' - unknown upstream index,
'X' - unknown return code, 'x' - return code 0
Type escape sequence to abort.
0 10.1.2.1 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24002 Exp: 0/0]
L 1 10.1.2.2 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/implicit-null Exp: 0/0] 0 ms
! 2 10.2.3.3 10 ms
示例2.联盟
本示例说明在使用BGP LU(RFC 3107)且未使用LDP时，eBGP（AS间）联盟链路上需要mpls activate命令。
此映像中的网络是具有65000自治系统65501、65502、65503和65504的联盟。
图15.
其思想是在两个自治系统中使用BGP LU，使MPLS LSP从R1到R8(BGP LU中的R8通告10.0.0.8/32)。
R7和R8之间有常规的eBGP LU。R2和R4之间以及R5和R6之间有连接的iBGP。R1和R2、R4和R5之间以及R6和R7之间有连接的eBGP。每个eBGP上都有下一跳 — self会话。
需要到eBGP对等体下一跳的静态路由（AS间BGP会话的典型路由），因为联盟内的子自治系统之间存在eBGP。
这是否足以在R1和R8之间建立连接？这意味着目标是从R1到R8的不间断LSP。
看这个。
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#traceroute 10.0.0.8
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.0.0.8
1 * * *
2 * * *
3 * * *
4 * * *
5 * * *
traceroute不返回任何跳/标签，如果命令上未提供TTL限制，将继续。路由器可能会应答traceroute，但数据包可能无法返回到R1。执行mpls traceroute是更安全的选择。
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#trace mpls ipv4 10.0.0.8/32
Tracing MPLS Label Switched Path to 10.0.0.8/32, timeout is 2 seconds
Codes: '!' - success, 'Q' - request not sent, '.' - timeout,
'L' - labeled output interface, 'B' - unlabeled output interface,
'D' - DS Map mismatch, 'F' - no FEC mapping, 'f' - FEC mismatch,
'M' - malformed request, 'm' - unsupported tlvs, 'N' - no rx label,
'P' - no rx intf label prot, 'p' - premature termination of LSP,
'R' - transit router, 'I' - unknown upstream index,
'X' - unknown return code, 'x' - return code 0
Type escape sequence to abort.
0 10.1.2.1 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24015 Exp: 0/0]
L 1 10.1.2.2 MRU 1500 [Labels: 24003/24014 Exp: 0/0] 10 ms
L 2 10.2.3.3 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24014 Exp: 0/0] 10 ms
N 3 10.3.4.4 MRU 0 [No Label] 10 ms
您看到问题出在R4上。LFIB中缺少传出接口：
RP/0/0/CPU0:R4#show mpls forwarding prefix 10.0.0.8/32
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24014 24014 10.0.0.8/32 10.4.5.5 5140
CEF中的条目未解析：
RP/0/0/CPU0:R4#show cef 10.0.0.8/32
10.0.0.8/32, version 109, drop adjacency, internal 0x5000001 0x0 (ptr 0xa14160e4) [1], 0x0 (0xa13f83c8), 0xa08 (0xa16cd370)
Updated Sep 13 12:43:30.252
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.4.5.5/32, 0 dependencies, recursive [flags 0x6000]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa0f182d8 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
unresolved
local label 24014
labels imposed {24014}
GE0/0/0/1接口上未启用MPLS:
RP/0/0/CPU0:R4#show mpls interfaces
Interface LDP Tunnel Static Enabled
-------------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0 Yes No No Yes
使用命令激活R4和R5之间链路上的BGP的MPLS，即可解决该问题。R4和R5在此链路上有一个eBGP联盟会话。实际上，这是联盟65000中的iBGP会话。因此，需要使用激活MPLS命令来确保R4上的前缀解析到下一跳R5。在其他常规网络中，将由LDP负责，但R4和R5之间没有LDP，因为它是联盟内的eBGP会话。
为R4上的接口ge 0/0/0/1添加mpls activate命令：
router bgp 65502
bgp confederation peers
65501
65503
65504
!
bgp confederation identifier 65000
mpls activate
interface GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1
!
…
RP/0/0/CPU0:R4#show mpls interfaces
Interface LDP Tunnel Static Enabled
-------------------------- -------- -------- -------- --------
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/0 Yes No No Yes
GigabitEthernet0/0/0/1 No No No Yes
traceroute现在显示从R1到R8的不间断LSP。
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#trace mpls ipv4 10.0.0.8/32
Tracing MPLS Label Switched Path to 10.0.0.8/32, timeout is 2 seconds
Codes: '!' - success, 'Q' - request not sent, '.' - timeout,
'L' - labeled output interface, 'B' - unlabeled output interface,
'D' - DS Map mismatch, 'F' - no FEC mapping, 'f' - FEC mismatch,
'M' - malformed request, 'm' - unsupported tlvs, 'N' - no rx label
'P' - no rx intf label prot, 'p' - premature termination of LSP,
'R' - transit router, 'I' - unknown upstream index,
'X' - unknown return code, 'x' - return code 0
Type escape sequence to abort.
0 10.1.2.1 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24015 Exp: 0/0]
L 1 10.1.2.2 MRU 1500 [Labels: 24003/24014 Exp: 0/0] 10 ms
L 2 10.2.3.3 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24014 Exp: 0/0] 10 ms
L 3 10.3.4.4 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24014 Exp: 0/0] 10 ms
L 4 10.4.5.5 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24014 Exp: 0/0] 20 ms
L 5 10.5.6.6 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/24014 Exp: 0/0] 30 ms
L 6 10.6.7.7 MRU 1500 [Labels: implicit-null/implicit-null Exp: 0/0] 30 ms
! 7 10.7.8.8 30 ms
RP/0/0/CPU0:R1#traceroute 10.0.0.8
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 10.0.0.8
1 10.1.2.2 [MPLS: Label 24015 Exp 0] 69 msec 29 msec 29 msec
2 10.2.3.3 [MPLS: Labels 24003/24014 Exp 0] 49 msec 29 msec 29 msec
3 10.3.4.4 [MPLS: Label 24014 Exp 0] 19 msec 19 msec 19 msec
4 10.4.5.5 [MPLS: Label 24014 Exp 0] 49 msec 19 msec 29 msec
5 10.5.6.6 [MPLS: Label 24014 Exp 0] 19 msec 19 msec 29 msec
6 10.6.7.7 [MPLS: Label 24014 Exp 0] 29 msec 29 msec 29 msec
7 10.7.8.8 29 msec * 29 msec
LFIB中现在有一个传出接口用于此条目：
RP/0/0/CPU0:R4#show mpls forwarding prefix 10.0.0.8/32
Local Outgoing Prefix Outgoing Next Hop Bytes
Label Label or ID Interface Switched
------ ----------- ------------------ ------------ --------------- ------------
24014 24014 10.0.0.8/32 Gi0/0/0/1 10.4.5.5 2890
R4上存在用于前缀的传出标签，CEF显示已解析的前缀：
RP/0/0/CPU0:R4#show cef 10.0.0.8/32
Updated Sep 13 12:43:30.252
Prefix Len 32, traffic index 0, precedence n/a, priority 4
via 10.4.5.5/32, 3 dependencies, recursive [flags 0x6000]
path-idx 0 NHID 0x0 [0xa17420e4 0x0]
recursion-via-/32
next hop 10.4.5.5/32 via 24016/0/21
local label 24014
next hop 10.4.5.5/32 Gi0/0/0/1 labels imposed {ImplNull 24014}
反馈