[Fwd: RE: [c-nsp] MPLS EXP label imposition]

[Neil J. McRae]

Dave,
Nope, you need to do it on all entry points. There are
other good reasons why you'd want to do this also. Bewarey
of GSR cards that can't cope with this though, trident E2 
being one of them. I agree that this is a PITA.

Neil. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net 
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of David Freedman
> Sent: 12 September 2005 10:15
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [Fwd: RE: [c-nsp] MPLS EXP label imposition]
> 
> /me forwards this on.
> 
> Does anybody else have a strategy for dealing with this?
> 
> I can't say that the default cisco behaviour of copying QoS 
> information from IP to MPLS automatically is a good thing for 
> us at the moment....
> 
> 
> Dave.
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] MPLS EXP label imposition
> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 08:33:11 +0200
> From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) <oboehmer at cisco.com>
> To: David Freedman <david.freedman at uk.clara.net>
> 
> David Freedman <mailto:david.freedman at uk.clara.net> wrote on Friday,
> September 09, 2005 12:39 PM:
> 
> >  >> If it is the default behaviour whether there is a global
> >  configuration >> to prevent this from happening.
> >  >> Or, if the only way to prevent this from happening is 
> to manually
> >  >> rewrite all precedence bits to 0.
> >  >
> > 
> > Following on from Merlin's Question, We're currently 
> looking at a way
> > of avoiding having to do this on all entrypoints.
> >
> > The problem is, whereas its simple to imply on connections 
> external to
> > the network (such as peering and transit), its not so simple when it
> > comes down to implying it on Gateway / PE routers, of which we have
> > lots in multiple countries with literally thousands of
> > interfaces/subinterfaces. 
> 
> I don't know anything about your network, but if it resembles 
> most other
> ISP networks, I don't think there is much you can do other 
> than applying
> a generic policy-map on all customer interfaces. Since you can use the
> same policy-map on all interfaces where you want to re-mark 
> the pkts to
> dscp default, this process should be script'able.
> 
> > We are mainly concerned, therefore in securing PE routers.
> > 
> > I experimented with QPPB for this, on the PE->P interfaces, 
> with a map
> > that set precedence to zero , such as:
> 
> I don't think QPPB will do what you want as it will, as you say, not
> differentiate between customers allowed to mark their pkts 
> and those who
> don't.
> 
> > Does anybody else have any ideas?
> 
> you sent this email unicast to me ;-)
> 
> 	oli
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>