Looks OK to me. Packet trace maybe? Just a note, you don’t need two out-labels on your tunnel (and so you don’t need to neos entry on RX)
/neale From: <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> on behalf of "omid via Lists.Fd.Io" <zeinalpouromid=yahoo....@lists.fd.io> Reply-To: "zeinalpouro...@yahoo.com" <zeinalpouro...@yahoo.com> Date: Monday, 30 April 2018 at 14:45 To: "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io" <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Cc: "vpp-dev@lists.fd.io" <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io> Subject: [vpp-dev] #vpp vpls configuration [cid:image001.jpg@01D3E09D.D0514270] Hi, my configurtion vpls is based on toplogy. VPLS configuration: MPLS L2VPN VPLS ######## ######## ######## ######## VPP1-VM1 ######## set int state eth1 up set int state eth0 up set int ip address eth1 2.1.1.1/24 mpls tabel add 0 set interface mpls eth1 enable mpls tunnel l2-only via 2.1.1.2 eth1 out-labels 34 out-labels 33 set int state mpls-tunnel0 up set interface l2 bridge mpls-tunnel0 1 set interface l2 bridge eth0 1 mpls local-label add eos 1023 via l2-input-on mpls-tunnel0 mpls local-label add non-eos 1024 via mpls-lookup-in-table 0 ######## ######## ######## ######## ####VPP2-VM###### set int state eth1 up set int state eth0 up set int ip address eth1 2.1.1.2/24 mpls table add 0 set interface mpls eth1 enable mpls tunnel l2-only via 2.1.1.1 eth1 out-labels 1024 out-labels 1023 set int state mpls-tunnel0 up set interface l2 bridge mpls-tunnel0 1 set interface l2 bridge eth0 1 mpls local-label add eos 33 via l2-input-on mpls-tunnel0 mpls local-label add non-eos 34 via mpls-lookup-in-table 0 ##################################################################### dont ping between host1 and host2.Is my configuration vpls correct based on topology?
