[c-nsp] Explicit path

[Jeff Tantsura]

Hi Oliver,

Why do you need a floating static to null0?
If you use explicit path without fallback to dynamic one there won't be any
LSP to transport the video traffic via 7600C, do I miss something?

For the VRF case - wouldn't it be easier to use "bgp next-hop" within VRF
instead of PBR ?

Thanks,
Jeff



> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
> Sent: dinsdag 20 februari 2007 7:56
> To: Michel Renfer; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Explicit path
> 
> Michel Renfer <> wrote on Monday, February 19, 2007 8:34 PM:
> 
> > Hi All
> >
> > Assume the following (sample) topology with 7600/Sup720-3b, SFX7
> > and MPLS encapsulation between all three 7600:
> >
> >
> >  Video SRC ---2 x GE--- 7600 A =====10G====== 7600 ---2 x GE--- Video
> > DST
> >                            \                   /
> >                             \                 /
> >                              \               /
> >                             1x GE          1x GE
> >                                \           /
> >                                 \         /
> >                                  \       /
> >                                   7600 C
> >
> > Video SRC sends out encapsulated MPEG2 transportstreams with a
> > total bandwidth of approx 1.1G. Traffic between 7600 A and B
> > can be transported inside a L3 VPN or with two EoMPLS tunnels)
> >
> > How can configure, that the traffic between Video SRC and Video
> > DST only used the path between 7600 A and B and never over C?
> > It is clear, that in case of a failure of the 10G link, the
> > connection between SRC and DST will be broken.
> >
> > Can someone give me the right pointer(s), how this can be
> > configured?
> 
> Hmm, is there a requirement to put the traffic into a L3VPN/VRF, or can
> it be in the global table?
> 
> If you can put this into the global table, just do the following
> 1) set up a TE tunnel with an explicit-path over A-B
> 2) statically route the destination over the tunnel and use a floating
> static Null0 route to drop the traffic in case the tunnel goes down
> (using PBR on 7600-A to send traffic over the tunnel doesn't work until
> 12.2SRB)
> 
> If the interfaces on 7600A and B are in a VRF, you need to play around
> with the BGP next-hop as follows:
> 1) set up a TE tunnel as before, but enable LDP on it
> 2) configure a new loopback interface (/32) on 7600B, and route this one
> statically to the tunnel (with a floating Null0 route to drop the
> traffic, as before)
> 3) use an inbound route-map on the vpnv4 iBGP connection to modify the
> next-hop of the vpnv4 video-dest-prefix to the new /32
> 
> Would this work?
> 
> 	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/