Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Cisco: NSP

Secondary VLAN deployment on Metro ETTH

 

 

Cisco nsp RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


pavel.skovajsa at gmail

Nov 23, 2009, 6:47 AM

Post #1 of 5 (716 views)
Permalink
Secondary VLAN deployment on Metro ETTH

Hi all,

I am planning to implement Secondary VLANs feature on a Metro ETTH
based on ME3400+76k. I have read various docs about the best I found
is on http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/07/14/private-vlans-revisited/

I have couple questions/scenarios I want to doublecheck with you:
1. Anybody using VPTv3 do disseminate the PVLAN info?
2. What if there are 3rd party switches in the environment placed
randomly between the ME3400?

Here is my train of thought:
- From the explanations in the various docs I understood that the
MAC address table for *downstream traffic* is stored in primary VLAN
table
- The reverse upstream traffic is stored in secondary VLAN MAC table
-> hence it follows (not written anywhere) that in order to
properly switch the traffic and not flood it, the PVLAN implementation
must do lookups in JOINED primary+secondary mac address table.

Now the problem might lie in having 3rd party switches placed
*between* ME3400 - they have no idea about the PVLANs hence forward it
according to their VLAN tables -> which are are NOT joined -> hence
the traffic is flooded on them.


-pavel skovajsa
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


pavel.skovajsa at gmail

Nov 25, 2009, 2:09 AM

Post #2 of 5 (664 views)
Permalink
Re: Secondary VLAN deployment on Metro ETTH [In reply to]

Hello,

Probably I do not have luck for proper audience for the questions below,
whatever the case I have began to test the Private VLAN deployment, and ran
into strange packet drop issue.

The test topology is simple: C7606 Gi1/22 -----fiber-----> Gi0/1
ME3400-24TS-A -> Fa0/3 client PC

The PVLAN is simple enough to post.

7606 running 12.2(33)SRC4:

vlan 14
name test
private-vlan primary
private-vlan association 140

vlan 140
name test_secondary
private-vlan isolated

interface Vlan14
description test
ip vrf forwarding ext
ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
no ip redirects
no ip unreachables
no ip proxy-arp
private-vlan mapping 140

interface GigabitEthernet1/22
description To_testing_ME3400-24-TS
switchport
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk allowed vlan 1-61,63-4094
switchport mode trunk
switchport nonegotiate
logging event link-status
load-interval 30
no snmp trap link-status


ME3400-24-TS-A running 12.2(52)SE:

vlan 14
name test
private-vlan primary
private-vlan association 140

vlan 140
name test_secondary
private-vlan isolated

interface GigabitEthernet0/1
port-type nni
switchport mode trunk
ip dhcp snooping trust

interface FastEthernet0/3
description test_secondary_vlan
switchport private-vlan host-association 14 140
switchport mode private-vlan host
load-interval 30
storm-control broadcast level pps 30
storm-control multicast level pps 30
ip dhcp snooping limit rate 100


Before the PVLAN is configured I have nice connectivity from the 7606 to the
client PC:
7606#ping vrf ext 1.1.1.2 repeat 1000 size 1400

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 1000, 1400-byte ICMP Echos to 1.1.1.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Success rate is 100 percent (1000/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/12 ms

However the moment I configure PVLAN (see above) I get this:
7606#ping vrf ext 1.1.1.2 repeat 1000 size 1400

Type escape sequence to abort.
Sending 1000, 1400-byte ICMP Echos to 1.1.1.2, timeout is 2 seconds:
!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!
!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!
!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!
!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!
!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!
!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!
!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!
!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!
!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!
!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!
.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.
!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!
!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!
!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!!!!!.!
!!!!!!!!!!!.!!!!!!!!
Success rate is 92 percent (926/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = 1/2/28 ms

Which is a very interesting output (besides nice ASCII art) because the
packet drop is regular - 12 pings work, 13th does not, 12 pings work, 13th
does not ...Thinking about it now, maybe it has to do something with the
number 13 :)

-pavel skovajsa

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Pavel Skovajsa <pavel.skovajsa [at] gmail>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I am planning to implement Secondary VLANs feature on a Metro ETTH
> based on ME3400+76k. I have read various docs about the best I found
> is on
http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/07/14/private-vlans-revisited/
>
> I have couple questions/scenarios I want to doublecheck with you:
> 1. Anybody using VPTv3 do disseminate the PVLAN info?
> 2. What if there are 3rd party switches in the environment placed
> randomly between the ME3400?
>
> Here is my train of thought:
> - From the explanations in the various docs I understood that the
> MAC address table for *downstream traffic* is stored in primary VLAN
> table
> - The reverse upstream traffic is stored in secondary VLAN MAC table
> -> hence it follows (not written anywhere) that in order to
> properly switch the traffic and not flood it, the PVLAN implementation
> must do lookups in JOINED primary+secondary mac address table.
>
> Now the problem might lie in having 3rd party switches placed
> *between* ME3400 - they have no idea about the PVLANs hence forward it
> according to their VLAN tables -> which are are NOT joined -> hence
> the traffic is flooded on them.
>
>
> -pavel skovajsa
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


lists at hojmark

Nov 25, 2009, 2:43 AM

Post #3 of 5 (652 views)
Permalink
Re: Secondary VLAN deployment on Metro ETTH [In reply to]

On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:09:12 +0100, you wrote:

> Probably I do not have luck for proper audience for the questions below,
> whatever the case I have began to test the Private VLAN deployment, and ran
> into strange packet drop issue.
>
> The test topology is simple: C7606 Gi1/22 -----fiber-----> Gi0/1
> ME3400-24TS-A -> Fa0/3 client PC

Why do you want to run PVLAN on the 3400? UNI ports already can't talk
to each other.

-A
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


pavel.skovajsa at gmail

Nov 25, 2009, 3:17 AM

Post #4 of 5 (653 views)
Permalink
Re: Secondary VLAN deployment on Metro ETTH [In reply to]

Hi,

yes that is right UNI ports can't talk to each other but only within one
ME3400 switch. If you have more switches and want exactly the same
"switchport protected" functionality on all of them, one solution is to
implement PVLANs.

See
http://www.rfc-editor.org/internet-drafts/draft-sanjib-private-vlan-10.txt for
example.

In my opinion this is a nice feature, but its implementation details are too
hidden from the engineer (similar as CBWFQ for example), so you can only
"trust" that it works and don't have too much options for troubleshooting.

We are forced to separate the end customers on our Metro ISP network due to
an incident where one customer decided it is a good idea to start flooding
nonsense into our L2 segment. PVLAN sounded like a nice solution, but given
to issues below I am open to suggestions how to separatate customer on L2.

-pavel

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists <lists [at] hojmark
> wrote:

> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 11:09:12 +0100, you wrote:
>
> > Probably I do not have luck for proper audience for the questions below,
> > whatever the case I have began to test the Private VLAN deployment, and
> ran
> > into strange packet drop issue.
> >
> > The test topology is simple: C7606 Gi1/22 -----fiber-----> Gi0/1
> > ME3400-24TS-A -> Fa0/3 client PC
>
> Why do you want to run PVLAN on the 3400? UNI ports already can't talk
> to each other.
>
> -A
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/


karol.mares at gmail

Nov 25, 2009, 9:56 AM

Post #5 of 5 (655 views)
Permalink
Re: Secondary VLAN deployment on Metro ETTH [In reply to]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Pavel Skovajsa
<pavel.skovajsa [at] gmail>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> yes that is right UNI ports can't talk to each other but only within one
> ME3400 switch. If you have more switches and want exactly the same
> "switchport protected" functionality on all of them, one solution is to
> implement PVLANs.
>
> See
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/internet-drafts/draft-sanjib-private-vlan-10.txtfor
> example.
>
>
>
That would not help if you have interconnection between several switches i.e
ring topology. You would need to use private-vlan turnk functionality which
is iirc not supported yet on Cisco 3400 to be able to isolated several vlans
between switches.

You can use just one private-vlan host or combination of UNI - NNI port type
chain between the switches. downlink UNI, uplink NNI and to use proxy-ARP to
take care of communication between the hosts.

--
iso
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Cisco nsp RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.