Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Severe ISIS TED Inconsistency #15988

Open
2 tasks done
Hawkins-Sherpherd opened this issue May 10, 2024 · 4 comments
Open
2 tasks done

Severe ISIS TED Inconsistency #15988

Hawkins-Sherpherd opened this issue May 10, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
triage Needs further investigation

Comments

@Hawkins-Sherpherd
Copy link

Description

I run ISIS on tunnels. ISIS run well on those tunnels, able to exchange ISIS packets normally. But when I try to implement MPLS-TE, ISIS TED go wrong.

I can see MPLS-TE enabled interfaces have complete information in "show isis database detail" and "show isis mpls-te interface", but in "show isis mpls-te database edge", I can only see partial MPLS-TE enabled interface has been learned. Even worse, every node learn different TED edges, totally inconsistent.

Outputs can be seen here:

They are all running in a private experimental network. Nothing open.

Version

FRRouting 9.1
FRRouting 10.0

How to reproduce

  1. Enable ISIS process
  2. Enable MPLS-TE and Segment Routing for ISIS process
  3. Configure loopback interface IPv6 address as MPLS-TE IPv6 router address
  4. Add Segment Routing SID for IPv6 address on loopback interface
  5. Assign unnumbered IPv4 address for interfaces
  6. Assign ULA IPv6 address for interfaces
  7. Add interfaces to ISIS process
  8. Set "isis network point-to-point"
  9. Add link-params for interfaces
  10. See link-params added interfaces shown up in "show isis mpls-te interface" and "show isis database detail" with complete information

Expected behavior

TED have full synchronization with ISIS database.

Actual behavior

TED don't have full synchronization on any node. Only several random edge have learned from ISIS database.

Additional context

No response

Checklist

  • I have searched the open issues for this bug.
  • I have not included sensitive information in this report.
@Hawkins-Sherpherd Hawkins-Sherpherd added the triage Needs further investigation label May 10, 2024
@Hawkins-Sherpherd
Copy link
Author

Switching tunnel protocol to GRETAP, the inconsistency has decreased.

@pguibert6WIND
Copy link
Member

Switching tunnel protocol to GRETAP, the inconsistency has decreased.

@Hawkins-Sherpherd , have you checked you are configured in point to point ? isis network point-to-point

@Hawkins-Sherpherd
Copy link
Author

Switching tunnel protocol to GRETAP, the inconsistency has decreased.

@Hawkins-Sherpherd , have you checked you are configured in point to point ? isis network point-to-point

I'm sure they are configured point to point.

@odd22
Copy link
Member

odd22 commented May 21, 2024

Can you send us the complete IS-IS and interface configuration you used as well as the output of "show isis database detail" and finally the output of "show isis mpls-te database detail"?
In particular, do you check that "link-params" are setup on each interfaces advertises by ISIS?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
triage Needs further investigation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants