On Tue, Feb 26, 2002 at 06:14:18PM -0000, Kevin Gannon wrote:
> <snip>
>
> >
> > My question is will the Cust PE tag the customer traffic with a label to
> get
> > the
> > trafic to the Agg PE by following the default router and then will the
> label
> > be popped
> > off and another L3 lookup be done and a new tag attached to get the
> traffic
> > to the
> > destination Agg PE.
>
> So something like
>
> CE---PE1----PE2---P---( cloud )
> ^ ^
> cust PE |
> agg PE
> We are looking at label exchange rather than matching VRFs on both the
> PE's. Mind you that might be an idea ...... :o).
>
> Maybe you could tell me a little more about the label exchange scenario
> between the two PE's. We do not want to run OSPF to the second PE (PE1)
> as we are conecerned about OSPF stability. Just as a ball park figure
> we might be talking 700 PE1's.
700 PE1s on a single PE2, or across the whole network?
No there will be a number of PE2s, we are mad but not that mad.
You have a whole bunch of choices, not all of them palatable or
reasonable. In no particular order:
- LDP + IGP
- LDP + static routes
- EBGP + labels (rfc3107)
** due out Real Soon Now, as I understand it
- Carrier's Carrier (LDP + {IGP|static routes} in a VRF)
- back-to-back VRFs
- Inter-provider BGP (EBGP AF_VPNv4)
Not wanting to run an IGP leaves you with statics+LDP, b2b VRFs (aka
'vrf lite') or the various BGP solutions. If you have 700 PE1s on a
single PE2, you've kinda painted yourself into a corner - you'll need
statics or b2b VRFs, I think.
Oh god thats a lot to think about some questions if I might:
1. The b2b VRFs is the VRF not tied to a physical interface
so if I wanted to present 10 VPNs on 10 ethernets on PE1
to the customer, I would need 10 interfaces such as FR PVCs
to the PE2 so I would have a "physical" interface to map
each VRF to one both sides ?
2. The Inter-provider BGP is new to me, briefly how would this help ?
3. How would the statics help me are you saying I could put a static
one PE1 say 192.0.0.0/8 would would cover all the possible PE2's
via the connected link to the neighbor PE2. Then PE2 would pop the
label and do an additional route/label lookup and forward the traffic
to the correct PE2 ?
> Maybe you could explain "no provisions that a default route is
> treated differently than any other route" in the above context. Any
> comments most welcome as my head hurts at this stage.
If PE2 sends a label via some mechanism to PE1 and the label mapping
is for 0.0.0.0/0, that label will be bound to the route just like it
would if PE2 send a label mapping for the address 10.0.0.0/8. You may
need to configure 'mpls ip default-route' on PE1; I'm not sure why
that knob is there but it's off by default.
**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the
presence of computer viruses.
For more information contact postmaster@lancomms.ie
phone + 353 1 4093000
fax + 353 1 4093001
**********************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:13:06 EDT