[c-nsp] MPLS/VPN + Internet Setup - Update

[Mark Tinka]

On Friday 04 August 2006 16:03, Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) wrote:

> NAT on the CE is clearly preferred..  I think it should work
> right away, haven't tried this with vrf-lite yet, though.

Will let you know :).

> Well, if you want to manage the CE from your NMS, you need to
> use unique addresses..  Using official/public addresses makes
> sure those are unique,

This is one of the biggest motivators for me in considering 
public IP addresses for the PE-CE link.

> but you could also use different 
> ranges.
> There once was a draft trying to get an IANA allocation for
> exactly this purpose (draft-guichard-pe-ce-addr-00.txt), but
> this never really went anywhere. This draft talks about this,
> so it's still worth a read..

Just went through it; yes, it captures all the thoughts I've been 
having about each scenario, quite well.

My initial plans were to assign PE-CE link IP addresses from the 
customer address range. The draft mentions similar cons I'd 
considered. But even though we do not route RFC 1918 addresses 
within our (global IP) core, I foresee co-ordination issues 
between the customers and ourselves, which could get worse as 
the product grows.

The use of public IP addresses seems to be *the hard choice* 
between evils :). Too bad the draft didn't make it.

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20060804/48608775/attachment.bin