This message was posted by a user wishing to remain anonymous
I have a one question about LSP.
Lspname Last Requested Reserved Highwater AdjustTime LastAdjust BW BW BW mark Left (sec)
a-x-c-11000kbps 26.9867Gbps 26.9867Gbps 27.209Gbps 1272 sec Mon Jan 24 13:44:50 202
a-x-c-21000kbps 1000kbps 0bps 1000kbps 1292 sec Mon Jan 24 13:42:40 2022
a-x-c-31000kbps 1000kbps 0bps 1000kbps 1311 sec Mon Jan 24 13:42:40 2022
This LSP with 26.9867Gbp (bre-x-spo-1) shouldn't share the traffic with the other lsp that are below?
It seems to me that it sends the traffic only one way and not the others.
LSP:
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth adjust-interval 600
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth adjust-threshold 10
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth minimum-bandwidth 1m
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth maximum-bandwidth 40g
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth adjust-threshold-overflow-limit 10
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth adjust-threshold-underflow-limit 10
set protocols mpls label-switched-path a-x-c-TMPL auto-bandwidth resignal-minimum-bandwidth
Container:
set groups protocols mpls container-label-switched-path a-x-c splitting-merging maximum-member-lsps 8
set groups protocols mpls container-label-switched-path a-x-c splitting-merging minimum-member-lsps 1
set groups protocols mpls container-label-switched-path a-x-c splitting-merging splitting-bandwidth 10g
set groups protocols mpls container-label-switched-path a-x-c splitting-merging merging-bandwidth 5g
Sometimes the LSP reserves 8 to 9G for the LSP (a-x-c-2/a-x-c-3) and ends up screwing with the RSVP calculation and diverting traffic to another path.
EX:
a-x-c-11000kbps 26.9867Gbps 26.9867Gbps 27.209Gbps 1272 sec Mon Jan 24 13:44:50 202
a-x-c-21000kbps 1000kbps 9Gbps 1000kbps 1292 sec Mon Jan 24 13:42:40 2022
a-x-c-31000kbps 1000kbps 9Gbps 1000kbps 1311 sec Mon Jan 24 13:42:40 2022
Original Message:
Sent: 07-05-2020 04:55
From: Unknown User
Subject: Container LSP and auto bw
Hello,
I don't see any controversy here. If You think of "maximum-*" as a ceiling, and not a target, then everything makes sense.
@sarahr202 wrote:
The ingress' attempt to bring up an LSP starts with this number of members and maximum signaling
bandwidth per member.
The algorithm to determine number of LSP and actual signaling BW does not stop here.
@sarahr202 wrote:
Contradicts:
As a result of splitting, one new member LSP A-E-2 is created with 5 GB of bandwidth and the
existing member LSP A-E-1 is re-signaled with 5 GB of bandwidth in a make-before-break way.
The maxium signalling BW is 8Gbs, so two member LSPs should be signaled with 8Gbs.
"Maximum-sgnaling-BW" is the ceiling, the actual signaling BW is taken from last AutoBW measurement/determined by AutoBW LSP utilization. It may be actually unequal per member if the paths to tailend have differing BW, my customer has such setup in production.
HTH
Thx
Alex