[Insider Sharing] Deploying RRPP

Created: Mar 6, 2014 16:26:12Latest reply: Sep 25, 2014 01:13:08 3707 6 0 1

Hi Guys,

 

Even if you have STP or MSTP or SEP or RRPP inside your layer 2 network, managing faults is always challenging.  Failures often transform to layer 2 loops which severely impacts the business. Some time ago I had an engineering case and I would like to share the story with you. So let’s start.

Working environment is very simple. We have a single RRPP ring deployed like below. 


SW3 (master RRPP related configuration)

#

vlan batch 2 to 4094

#

stp disable

#

rrpp enable

#

 

#

stp region-configuration

 instance 1 vlan 2 to 4094

 active region-configuration

#

rrpp domain 1

 control-vlan 4091

 protected-vlan reference-instance 1

 ring 1 node-mode t primary-port XGigabitEthernet0/0/2 secondary-port XGigabitEthernet0/0/1 level 0

 ring 1 enable

#

interface XGigabitEthernet0/0/1

 port link-type trunk

 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 4094

 stp disable

#

interface XGigabitEthernet0/0/2

 port link-type trunk

 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 4094

 stp disable

#


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 SW1, SW2, SW4 and SW5 RRPP related configuration.


#

vlan batch 2 to 4094

#

stp disable

#

rrpp enable

#

stp region-configuration

 instance 1 vlan 2 to 4094

 active region-configuration

#

rrpp domain 1

 control-vlan 4091

 protected-vlan reference-instance 1

 ring 1 node-mode transit primary-port XGigabitEthernet0/0/2 secondary-port XGigabitEthernet0/0/1 level 0

 ring 1 enable

#

interface XGigabitEthernet0/0/1

 port link-type trunk

 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 4094

 stp disable

#

interface XGigabitEthernet0/0/2

 port link-type trunk

 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 4094

 stp disable

#


What do you think it will happen if we deploy this configuration? It will successfully break the loop and avoid any broadcast storm? Apparently this configuration will guaranty a loop free domain, but we didn’t consider one point.

VLAN 1, default vlan, is not protected.   Even If we didn’t explicitly configured, as you can see below, VLAN 1 is contained by all interfaces, because is the default vlan, which cannot be deleted and does not need to be created. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1    common  UT:GE0/0/2(D)      GE0/0/3(D)      GE0/0/4(U)      GE0/0/5(D)     

                GE0/0/6(D)      GE0/0/7(D)      GE0/0/8(D)      GE0/0/9(D)     

                GE0/0/10(D)     GE0/0/11(D)     GE0/0/12(D)     GE0/0/13(D)    

                GE0/0/14(D)     GE0/0/15(D)     GE0/0/16(D)     GE0/0/17(D)    

                GE0/0/18(D)     GE0/0/19(D)     GE0/0/20(D)     GE0/0/22(D)    

                GE0/0/23(U)     GE0/0/24(D)     XGE0/0/1(U)     XGE0/0/2(D)

#

vlan batch 2 to 4094

#

stp region-configuration

 instance 1 vlan 2 to 4094


In this situation, broadcast storm might occur on vlan1 causing equipments to overload and disrupt traffic on other vlans, including control-vlan 4091, so hello control packets will be loss and RRPP ring will become unstable. You don’t to experience this. 

You have two solutions:

1.       1. Adjust region configuration to include vlan 1.

#

stp region-configuration

 instance 1 vlan 1 to 4094

2.    #

2.     2. Remove vlan 1 from trunks.

#

interface XGigabitEthernet0/0/2

 port link-type trunk

 undo port trunk allow-pass vlan 1

 port trunk allow-pass vlan 2 to 4094

 stp disable

#

That’s all, hope to find this case useful.  


  • x
  • convention:

tron     Created Sep 2, 2014 20:34:39 Helpful(0) Helpful(0)

very good post, I wonder if you could help me with an example of a configuration of three consecutive rings. I've been struggling with that
thank you
  • x
  • convention:

Sophoni     Created Mar 7, 2014 18:26:08 Helpful(0) Helpful(0)

Thanks for your share!

 

  • x
  • convention:

StarOfWest  Engager   Created Sep 5, 2014 15:11:49 Helpful(0) Helpful(0)

Sure, follow below link:


http://support.huawei.com/ehedex/pages/DOC1000042064DED0417A/02/DOC1000042064DED0417A/02/resources/dc/dc_cfg_rrpp_0031.html?ft=0&id=dc_cfg_rrpp_0031

  • x
  • convention:

tron     Created Sep 6, 2014 02:44:20 Helpful(0) Helpful(0)

thank you very much, I had a few doubts about the implementation with three rings
  • x
  • convention:

StarOfWest  Engager   Created Sep 9, 2014 16:47:15 Helpful(0) Helpful(0)

Welcome!
  • x
  • convention:

tron     Created Sep 25, 2014 01:13:08 Helpful(0) Helpful(0)

Hello I have problem with a configuration of three consecutive rings within a single domain.

and is giving me the following error:


A conflicting master node was detected on RRPP domain 1 ring 2.
Received packet on port Ethernet0/0/23 error ! Reason : Packet Handle Error .
Received packet on port Ethernet0/0/24 error ! Reason : packet type doesn't match .


in this configuration two domains to three rings are used. There is some variation of three rings and a single domain?


http://support.huawei.com/ehedex/pages/DOC1000042064DED0417A/02/DOC1000042064DED0417A/02/resources/dc/dc_cfg_rrpp_0031.html?ft=0&id=dc_cfg_rrpp_0031

  • x
  • convention:

Reply

Reply
You need to log in to reply to the post Login | Register

Notice: To protect the legitimate rights and interests of you, the community, and third parties, do not release content that may bring legal risks to all parties, including but are not limited to the following:
  • Politically sensitive content
  • Content concerning pornography, gambling, and drug abuse
  • Content that may disclose or infringe upon others ' commercial secrets, intellectual properties, including trade marks, copyrights, and patents, and personal privacy
Do not share your account and password with others. All operations performed using your account will be regarded as your own actions and all consequences arising therefrom will be borne by you. For details, see " Privacy."
If the attachment button is not available, update the Adobe Flash Player to the latest version!
Fast reply Scroll to top