[c-nsp] PFR Question
jack daniels
jckdaniels12 at gmail.com
Mon Mar 29 13:14:32 EDT 2010
LINK for same -
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_vpn_pece_lnk_prot.html#wp1054704
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:06 AM, jack daniels <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>wrote:
> I found on internet
>
> MPLS VPN LOCAL LABEL - with BGP
>
> basically this is via advertising same label on primary PE for prefix for
> both primary and secondary paths.So that if primary path fails then same
> label can be used to Primary PE ( primary PE CE link down) ,,, then Primary
> PE route traffic to secondary CE .
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> On 3/28/10, David Prall <dcp at dcptech.com> wrote:
>>
>> PfR takes care of the rerouting on a site basis. The site is monitoring
>> reachability to a particular prefix. The key issue with a single cloud, is
>> that you don't control the end to end path. If it is two clouds then you
>> can
>> monitor end to end via each cloud, and choose which one is better to use
>> for
>> a particular prefix or traffic type.
>>
>> --
>> http://dcp.dcptech.com
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: jack daniels [mailto:jckdaniels12 at gmail.com]
>> > Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 10:20 PM
>> > To: David Prall
>> > Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PFR Question
>> >
>> > IN SCENARIO BOTH LINKS FROM SAME SERVICE PROVIDER -But how will this
>> > avoid drops when PE1and CE1 link goes down as MPBGP bring secondary
>> > path as best in BGP table ( MPLS domain )and then to routing table will
>> > take atleast 3 min.
>> > Till secondry path not in routing table there will be pcket drops.So
>> > PE3 will converge so fast.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 3/26/10, David Prall <dcp at dcptech.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > This is where PfR is involved to route around the primary carrier
>> > to the
>> > secondary.
>> >
>> > --
>> > http://dcp.dcptech.com
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: jack daniels [mailto:jckdaniels12 at gmail.com]
>> > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 8:50 PM
>> > > To: David Prall
>> > > Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PFR Question
>> > >
>> > > Hi David,
>> > >
>> > > In a multipath instance PE1 will install the Equal Cost route
>> > with rd
>> > > 1:1
>> > > first, using 1:2 as a secondary path only. Opposite on PE2.???
>> > > whne both paths have equal cost the why route with rd1:1 will
>> > be
>> > > primary always
>> > > and rd 1:2 will be secondary on PE1.
>> > >
>> > > EVEN IF WE advertise X.X.X.X from PE1 and PE2 still PE3 will
>> > have two
>> > > routes in BGP table . But one in routing table.
>> > > But how will this avoid drops when PE1and CE1 link goes down as
>> > BGP
>> > > bring secondary path to Primary and then to routing table will
>> > take
>> > > atleast 3 min.
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:29 AM, David Prall <dcp at dcptech.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > 1)
>> > > On PE1
>> > > vrf description customer
>> > > rd 1:1
>> > > route-target both 1:1
>> > > route-target import 1:2
>> > > On PE2
>> > > vrf description customer
>> > > rd 1:2
>> > > route-target both 1:2
>> > > route-target import 1:1
>> > >
>> > > In a multipath instance PE1 will install the Equal Cost
>> > route
>> > > with rd 1:1
>> > > first, using 1:2 as a secondary path only. Opposite on
>> > PE2.
>> > >
>> > > 2)
>> > > Could use different VRF's. Just like dual carriers. A key
>> > concern
>> > > is a dual
>> > > failure, site 1 on network 1 and site 2 on network 2. The
>> > > customer will need
>> > > to provide a path between the two networks via one of
>> > their
>> > > sites.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > David
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > http://dcp.dcptech.com <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > From: jack daniels [mailto:jckdaniels12 at gmail.com]
>> > >
>> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 2:41 PM
>> > > > To: David Prall
>> > > > Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PFR Question
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > > Hi David ,
>> > > >
>> > > > thanks man I got the basic idea :)
>> > > >
>> > > > 1) but please explain in more detail this
>> > > >
>> > > > Single VRF, 2 distinct RD's. The VRF imports both,
>> > exports one.
>> > > The
>> > > > RD's are
>> > > > different so that multipath can be used within the core
>> > > typically. But
>> > > > in
>> > > > this case they wouldn't use multipath and the local RD
>> > would be
>> > > used as
>> > > > the
>> > > > determining factor on import of which route is
>> > installed
>> > > first.??????
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > 2) Also if I use diffrent VRF for CE4---CE2 path that
>> > will also
>> > > work -
>> > > > ??
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:57 PM, David Prall
>> > <dcp at dcptech.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > If the link goes away, then the update should be
>> > pretty
>> > > quick.
>> > > >
>> > > > Single VRF, 2 distinct RD's. The VRF imports
>> > both,
>> > > exports one.
>> > > > The RD's are
>> > > > different so that multipath can be used within
>> > the core
>> > > > typically. But in
>> > > > this case they wouldn't use multipath and the
>> > local RD
>> > > would be
>> > > > used as the
>> > > > determining factor on import of which route is
>> > installed
>> > > first.
>> > > >
>> > > > The local CE (CE3) is probing for the subnet at
>> > CE1. When
>> > > it is
>> > > > no longer
>> > > > reachable by CE3 it will move the route to CE4.
>> > As long
>> > > as CE4 is
>> > > > using CE2
>> > > > as the path via the cloud then no issue.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > David
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > >
>> > > > http://dcp.dcptech.com <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > > From: jack daniels
>> > [mailto:jckdaniels12 at gmail.com]
>> > > >
>> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 2:19 PM
>> > > > > To: David Prall
>> > > > > Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > > > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PFR Question
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > > If a single carrier, then the CE4/CE2 path
>> > needs to be
>> > > via
>> > > > > a second RD so that the paths within the
>> > carrier are
>> > > preferred
>> > > > and the
>> > > > > same
>> > > > > will happen.????
>> > > > > DO YOU mean we need to have diifrent vrf on
>> > secondry
>> > > end to end
>> > > > path.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I didnt get this if single carrier as link PE1
>> > and CE1
>> > > link
>> > > > fails
>> > > > > ....CE3 send traffic for X.X.X.X to PE3.PE3
>> > still has
>> > > next hop
>> > > > in its
>> > > > > vrf table as PE1....
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Please help me as still confused if two
>> > carriers , how
>> > > will
>> > > > this
>> > > > > hhappen
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:29 PM, David Prall
>> > > <dcp at dcptech.com>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Is MPLS Domain a single carrier, or two
>> > carriers.
>> > > If two
>> > > > carriers
>> > > > > then the
>> > > > > CE3/CE4 site will see that they can't
>> > reach via
>> > > CE3/CE1
>> > > > path and
>> > > > > switch over
>> > > > > to CE4/CE2 path. If a single carrier,
>> > then the
>> > > CE4/CE2
>> > > > path needs
>> > > > > to be via
>> > > > > a second RD so that the paths within the
>> > carrier
>> > > are
>> > > > preferred
>> > > > > and the same
>> > > > > will happen. PfR is providing end-to-end
>> > > reachability
>> > > > information
>> > > > > in this
>> > > > > case, and based on that changing the
>> > local
>> > > routing table.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > David
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > > > http://dcp.dcptech.com
>> > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > From: jack daniels
>> > > [mailto:jckdaniels12 at gmail.com]
>> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 1:07 PM
>> > > > > > To: David Prall
>> > > > > > Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > > > > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PFR Question
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > But if you have --
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > |CE1--------PE1
>> > > > > > PE3--------CE3
>> > > > > > X.X.X.X---------| ----
>> > --------
>> > > --------
>> > > > MPLS
>> > > > > DOMAIN-----
>> > > > > > --------------
>> > > > > > | CE2--------PE2
>> > > > > > PE4--------CE4
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Now my primary link is CE1-PE1 and
>> > secondary is
>> > > CE2-PE2
>> > > > > > If my CE1-PE1 goes down i route traffic
>> > via
>> > > CE2-
>> > > > PE2<<<<<<I
>> > > > > understand
>> > > > > > this ok...
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > when traffic from CE3 for X.X.X.X
>> > reaches PE3 ,
>> > > next
>> > > > hop is
>> > > > > still PE1 (
>> > > > > > as MPBGP has not converged so fast in
>> > MPLS
>> > > domain of
>> > > > SP) ...so
>> > > > > how will
>> > > > > > traffic be forwareded , as PFR claims 3
>> > sec.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:16 PM, David
>> > Prall
>> > > > <dcp at dcptech.com>
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > PfR is a unidirectional feature.
>> > The
>> > > router on
>> > > > the other
>> > > > > end
>> > > > > > needs to be
>> > > > > > configured with PfR as well in
>> > order to
>> > > have
>> > > > > bidirectional
>> > > > > > visibility.
>> > > > > > Typically the master controller
>> > will be
>> > > local to
>> > > > the
>> > > > > site.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > http://dcp.dcptech.com
>> > > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/> <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > > > <http://dcp.dcptech.com/>
>> > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > > > > > From: cisco-nsp-
>> > bounces at puck.nether.net
>> > > > [mailto:cisco-
>> > > > > nsp-
>> > > > > > > bounces at puck.nether.net] On
>> > Behalf Of
>> > > jack
>> > > > daniels
>> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010
>> > 12:35 PM
>> > > > > > > To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] PFR
>> > Question
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > dear guys,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > is my mail being delivered to
>> > group as
>> > > no one
>> > > > replied.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:42
>> > PM, jack
>> > > daniels
>> > > > > > > <jckdaniels12 at gmail.com>wrote:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Hi Network champs,
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I'm stuck in understanding of
>> > PFR .
>> > > Docs say
>> > > > it
>> > > > > converges in
>> > > > > > 3 sec (
>> > > > > > > for
>> > > > > > > > realtime traffic VOICE )...
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > I understand you can send
>> > traffic out
>> > > > secondry link
>> > > > > but what
>> > > > > > about
>> > > > > > > traffic
>> > > > > > > > which has to come back from
>> > remote
>> > > end ( for
>> > > > which SP
>> > > > > has not
>> > > > > > > converged).
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > But if you have --
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > |CE1--------PE1
>> > > > > > > > PE3--------CE3
>> > > > > > > > X.X.X.X---------|
>> > --
>> > > --------
>> > > > --------
>> > > > > --MPLS
>> > > > > > > > DOMAIN-------------------
>> > > > > > > > | CE2--
>> > ------
>> > > PE2
>> > > > > > > > PE4--------CE4
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Now my primary link is CE1-
>> > PE1 and
>> > > secondary
>> > > > is CE2-
>> > > > > PE2
>> > > > > > > > If my CE1-PE1 goes down i
>> > route
>> > > traffic via
>> > > > CE2-
>> > > > > PE2<<<<<<I
>> > > > > > understand
>> > > > > > > this
>> > > > > > > > ok...
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > BUT MY QUESTION IS -
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > PE3 and PE4 ( for this VRF)
>> > still has
>> > > NOW
>> > > > converged
>> > > > > the BGP
>> > > > > > and still
>> > > > > > > for
>> > > > > > > > it next hop for X.X.X.X is
>> > PE1. So
>> > > how fwd
>> > > > can happen
>> > > > > in 3
>> > > > > > sec untill
>> > > > > > > > Service providers all routers
>> > dont
>> > > converge
>> > > > and
>> > > > > understand
>> > > > > > that CE1-
>> > > > > > > PE1 link
>> > > > > > > > is down.
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > Regards
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > > cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-
>> > > > nsp at puck.nether.net
>> > > > > > >
>> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-
>> > > > nsp
>> > > > > > > archive at
>> > > > http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list