[c-nsp] VRF-LITE

[Fedorov, Konstantin]

 Hi,

Cisco doesn't use Kompella VPN's , only Martini and of cause over mpls
also.

This is known like AToM.
 
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6603/products_white_paper09186a008
04fbda5.shtml

-----------------------
Sincerely Yours,
Konstantin Fedorov

-----Original Message-----
From: Sergio D. [mailto:sdanelli at gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 7:46 PM
To: Fedorov, Konstantin
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VRF-LITE

Thanks for the responses. Juniper does not use L2TPv3 as of yet that I
know of. Does anyone have a good link or configuration example of
using this in a forwarding plane for an M-BGP L3VPN?
Thanks,

On 11/8/06, Fedorov, Konstantin <kfedor at amt.ru> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sergio, I suppose that Cisco's VRF-lite concept closely
> to Logical-router concept on Juniper side.
>
> -----------------------
> Sincerely Yours,
> Konstantin Fedorov
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Bruce Pinsky
> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 9:40 AM
> To: Sergio D.
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VRF-LITE
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sergio D. wrote:
> > Thanks for your response.
> > Can the VRF lite router able to route between VRFs? and if they have
> > no relation to other VRFs on other routers, how come they use vrf
> > route targets and all the works?
>
>
> You may import/export route targets between VRFs within the same
router.
> The use of RDs and RTs within a VRF Lite router is simply the
mechanism
> by
> which the routing table instances are differentiated from each other
> (and
> happens to be consistent with L3VPNs between PEs).  I like to think of
> VRF
> Lite as a degenerative form of L3VPN where all the VPNs exist in the
> same
> router (PE).
>
> > We also have some PE routers with the same vrf route targets but
> > without any MPLS configuration just ip tag switching on the
interface,
> > since they are only one hop away is the Label exchanged only with
BGP?
> > How can I check the VPN label?
> > I know I need to RTFM, but not getting there fast enough :).
> >
>
> Why do you differentiate MPLS from ip tag switching?  Tag switching is
> just
> tag switching regardless of the label exchange protocol (LDP or TDP).
>
> I think the thing to remember is that RFC4364 VPNs (formerly 2547bis)
> are
> formed by exchanging routes with route targets via MP-BGP.  This
allows
> multiplexing of the control plane over a single BGP session instead of
> multiple independent BGP sessions (i.e. full mesh of BGP sessions per
> VRF
> per PE).  Since the core is ignorant to the specific VPN
relationships,
> it
> can switch the packets between PEs over "tunnels" by using label
> forwarding
> (MPLS) or IP forwarding (L2TPv3).  In other words L3VPNs are enabled
via
> MP-BGP at the edge regardless of the method used to "tunnel" the
packets
> from PE->PE.
>
> - --
> =========
> bep
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFFUXvPE1XcgMgrtyYRAtjPAKDQOrupA/cOxTE7ottJil8LcSo8jgCgn7rF
> yLtQmX5XTGHTUVSVM4Ukch8=
> =9186
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
>


-- 
Sergio Danellli
JNCIE #170