[c-nsp] Cisco's MVPN solution with or without MDT SAFI

[Jeff Tantsura]

Hi Rod,

You should do it to fix CSCef97738

>From CCO:
Even though the benefits of MDT SAFI are for SSM tree building, MDT SAFI
must also be configured when using MVPN with the default MDT group in PIM
sparse-mode. From the multicast point of view, the new BGP AF does not need
to be configured for MVPN to work with a PIM-SM core. However, the fix for
CSCef97738, which was introduced in Release 12.0(30)S1, mandates that the
new address family be configured in order to create the MTI interface in
certain conditions. Without this notification, the multicast tunnel would
not be created, and hence MVPN will not work (even with PIM-SM). It should
be noted, that in the case of PIM-SM in the core, while the MDT SAFI needs
to be configured, it is not required to actually receive MDT advertisements
to establish MDT PIM relationships.


Cheers,
Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Oliver, Rod
> Sent: maandag 22 oktober 2007 11:17
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco's MVPN solution with or without MDT SAFI
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> I'm working on a project with which requires a deployment of MVPNs. We
> are struggling with whether or not we need to upgrade the PE and route
> reflectors in order to support the MDT SAFI.
> 
> In the lab we can make things work both with and without the MDT SAFI.
> As far as I can understand the reasoning for moving to a deployment of
> MVPN with the MDT SAFI was that the pre-MDT SAFI use of extended
> communities was non-standard and could clash with the use of 4-byte AS
> in VPNv4 routes, and that it would also preclude inter-AS MVPNs. This is
> based on a reading of
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6604/products_white_paper0900aecd8
> 0581f3d.shtml.
> 
> We have no requirement for inter-AS MVPNs and there will be no 4-byte
> ASNs associated with routes in the MVPNs deployed. Does this mean that
> we would be safe in the deployment of extended communities-based
> solution?
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Rod Oliver
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/