[alcatel-nsp] 7750SR and Juniper MX480 VPLS full mesh interopt

[Garcia Del Rio, Diego (Diego)]

HI Simon,

Im not sure how to configure the equivalent of spoke or mesh on the juniper, but at least on this 3-node topology, the two mesh-sdps on the 7750 will never allow traffic to pass between them, so you will never have a loop.

Also, as long as pc and server are communicating bidirectionally, you should have mac-learning and no flooding. If only the server is sending traffic and the client's MAC has never been learnt, the MX(A) would flood to the 7750 and the MX-B. If the MX-B is configured as a mesh as well (which all vplses by default should) then you will not have any further propagation from MX-B to 7750.

Unless you're trying to configure the VPLS on the MX as H-VPLS (with the equivalent of Spoke-sdps in ALU-speak) you should be ok.

Do you actually have a problem or is it something you're checking in advance?

Best Regards,

[cid:image001.gif at 01CC8F3F.203A8740]
DIEGO GARCÍA DEL RIO
ALCATEL-LUCENT
IPD PRODUCT MANAGEMENT
777 E. Middlefield Rd
Mountain View CA 94043
Mobile: +1 (415) 439-9420
OnNet: 2852-2726
diego.garcia_del_rio at alcatel-lucent.com

From: alcatel-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:alcatel-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of simon lee
Sent: Thursday, 20 October 2011 3:23 PM
To: alcatel-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [alcatel-nsp] 7750SR and Juniper MX480 VPLS full mesh interopt

Hi All,

Got question regarding the following VPLS setup:

7750SR(A) <--------------->MX480(A)<---------------->MX480(B)<----------------->7750SR(A)
                    mesh-sdp                                                     mesh-sdp

- All PE suppose to be fully mesh in a triangular formation.
- 7750SR VPLS service configured using  mesh sdp with the 2 Juniper MX480.
- Server at MX480(A), while client PC at 7750SR.

Question is, when client PC wish to establish connection with server, will there be a loop or mac-move trigger on 7750SR? Will the mesh-mesh violation between MX480(B) and 7750SR take place hence deny any traffic traverse via that LSP tunnel and instead traffic will proceed thru MX480(A)?

Appreciate if anyone could help and comment.... Thanks.

Regards,
Simon



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/alcatel-nsp/attachments/20111020/af6a996e/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1352 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/alcatel-nsp/attachments/20111020/af6a996e/attachment.gif>