{"id":18638,"date":"2020-02-18T13:49:21","date_gmt":"2020-02-18T13:49:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/made4it.com.br\/blog\/interconnecting-two-virtual-systems-vs-on-huawei-ne-platform-interconnecting-2-virtual-routers-on-huawei-ne\/"},"modified":"2026-06-29T19:40:19","modified_gmt":"2026-06-29T19:40:19","slug":"interconnecting-two-virtual-systems-vs-on-huawei-ne-platform-interconnecting-2-virtual-routers-on-huawei-ne","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/made4it.com.br\/en\/blog\/interconnecting-two-virtual-systems-vs-on-huawei-ne-platform-interconnecting-2-virtual-routers-on-huawei-ne\/","title":{"rendered":"Interconnecting two Virtual Systems (VS) on Huawei NE platform (Interconnecting 2 virtual routers on Huawei NE)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Huawei\u2019s NE40 series\u2014particularly the M2K and M2K-B models\u2014is becoming the new \u201cfavorite\u201d among ISPs in Brazil, enabling a variety of deployment scenarios with excellent cost-effectiveness, both at the network core layer (BGP, aggregation routers, and the like) and the access layer (IPoE BNGs, PPPoE, etc.).

Recently at Made4it, we had a case where a customer with an NE40E-M2K-B needed chassis-level virtualization so that a partner could also take advantage of the chassis\u2019s resources, but with a certain level of segregation.<\/p>\n

With our knowledge and expertise with the vendor, we suggested and designed a Virtual System in the box for this purpose, and, following the vendor’s recommendation, we informed the customer that the communication between the “virtual-systems” should be through dedicated network ports, where we would have a “physical loop” to deliver data to the partner’s “virtual-system”. Here in the company, we have come to affectionately call this feature the “coffin strap<\/em>” (laughs). <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n

With this, \n the first way<\/strong>\n<\/em> to link two VS is simply to connect a cable between two ports on the same router, allocating each port to a single VS.<\/p>\n

Se quer saber mais sobre virtualiza\u00e7\u00e3o de roteadores Huawei, consulte o post Roteadores Virtuais (VS \/ Virtual-System) no Huawei NE<\/a><\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

In this same scenario, a while back we carried out an implementation where his requirement was simple, basically:\u201cMy carrier is connecting to me through two different devices on my network: a BGP router and an MPLS switch located 40 km from here. The carrier wants to use MPLS with me. I need to route MPLS on my NE40, where the carrier will provide me with circuits on some VPWSs.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

In this case the deployment went smoothly, using the “Virtual Ethernet <\/em>” feature where the “layer2” side and the “layer3” side have distinct interfaces to work the VPWS and do the IP connectivity respectively.<\/p>\n


If you don’t know about MPLS on NE routers, or if the concept of “layer2 side” or “layer3 side” didn’t make sense, see the post L3 Interfaces in L2 MPLS Tunnels on Huawei NE Router (How to configure MPLS with IP on Huawei)<\/a> <\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The other way to link…<\/h3>\n\n

In our constant, daily exchanges of experience between the N2 and N3 teams, one of our consultants had an insight in a moment of reverie (usually in the shower, in the bathroom, opening the fridge, walking, etc):

\u201cWe know that a virtual Ethernet has a Layer 2 side and a Layer 3 side. And we know that we can place one of these sides in a virtual system<\/em> other than the admin system<\/em>, since virtual Ethernet interfaces<\/em> can only be created in the admin virtual system<\/em>. Now imagine: if we created two different VE groups<\/em> and used an MPLS<\/em> circuit-cross-connection (CCC) <\/em>to link these two Layer 2 sides, would it be possible for the virtual systems<\/em> to communicate at Layer 3 without needing the loopback link?<\/em>\u201d

<\/em>Just to name a few, CCC is the most basic, non-signaling way to connect two services via a VPWS.<\/p>\n

Then we set out to test the interconnection of two local VS via an MPLS CCC.<\/p>\n\n

Interconnecting two VS via VPN VPWS CCC<\/h2>\n\n

Scenario:<\/strong><\/p>\n

For our tests we will use two VE-GROUPs, interconnect the L2 of the VE-GROUPs via CCC VPWS, and keep one side L3 in Admin-VS while the other side L3 we will put in VS1.<\/p>\n\n

\"\"<\/figure>\n\n

Settings:<\/strong><\/p>\n

First, we will create the interfaces that will be part of L2:<\/p>\n\n

# Admin-VS ! Side L2 Admin-VS Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/100 interface  ve-group 100 l2-terminate Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/100,100 interface  vlan-type dot1q 100 ! Side L2 VS1 Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/200 interface  ve-group 200 l2-terminate Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/200.100 interface  vlan-type dot1q 100<\/pre>\n\n
After that we will interconnect VLAN 100 via VPN VPWS CCC:<\/p>\n\n
! MPLS CCC VPWS interconnectionccc test interface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/100.100 tagged out-interface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/200.100 tagged<\/pre>\n\n
With layer2 configured, we can move on to activating the L3 services:<\/p>\n\n
# Admin-VS ! Side L3 Admin-VS Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/101 interface  mac-address c4b8-b434-ab45  ve-group 100 l3-access interface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/101.100  vlan-type dot1q 100  ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252  ! Side L3 VS1 interface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/201  ve-group 200 l3-access interface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/201.100  vlan-type dot1q 100<\/pre>\n\n
Finally, we will insert only the L3 subinterface for VS1.<\/span><\/p>\n\n
# Admin-VSadmin virtual-system vs1 pvmb slot 3 port-mode port assign interface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/201.100  # VS1 ! VS1 L3 Sideinterface Virtual-Ethernet0\/2\/201.100 vlan-type dot1q 100 ip address 10.1.1.2 255.255.255.252<\/pre>\n\n
Scenario Considerations<\/h3>\n\n
Some considerations of the scenario:<\/p>\n