[c-nsp] ISP / MPLS "POP" design

[Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)]

>
> 
>On 11/6/13 4:52 PM, CiscoNSP List wrote:
>> Don't forget to use per PE/VRF RDs.
>>
>> re per PE RD's - So you are suggesting for each PE, I use unique RD's
>>for a given VRF?  I could see this would assist with
>>troubleshooting(Being able to see which PE a route originated from), are
>>there any other benefits/why is this recommended?
>(Disclaimer: coffee not brewed yet) At least with route reflectors and
>possibly to some degree with confederations (see disclaimer), you lose
>the ability to load-share to a prefix with non-unique RDs, as the RR
>boils multiple paths down to one best path which is reflected to other
>nodes.  The unique RD is embedded in the 96-bit vpnv4 route and
>therefore the ingress node (potentially) can see multiple load-sharable
>routes for which multiple outer labels can be rotated.

strong ack, unique RDs is a strong recommendation, also for convergence.
When you have an alternate path available, you can switch over to it
quickly (BGP PIC Edge), whether you're loadsharing across the multiple
paths or not..

	oli