[c-nsp] MPLS on CAT5500

[Phil Bedard]

So you are running MPLS on it today or no?  If you are doing RFC4364  
VPNs, you have one label still going to the PE from the P.  If you  
need to do VPN from PE2 to PE1 then the 5500 will see two labels.   
Does the RSM support the "mpls mtu" command?  Is TDP still supported  
on the other boxes?

Phil


On Jan 18, 2008, at 2:09 PM, Brandon Price wrote:

> PE1 to P is 100mb link which supports Jumbo frames no problem.
> The 5500 also acts as a PE for a few of our COLO customers so It needs
> to
> Be running MPLS while I transition the WAN links from PE1 to PE2
>
> Hope that makes sense..
>
> Brandon Price
> Sterling Communications Inc.
>
> /31 <--- The Subnet Formally Known as "Unusable"
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Bedard [mailto:philxor at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 10:57 AM
> To: Brandon Price
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] MPLS on CAT5500
>
> What is the PE1 to P link? I would try very hard to not use the 5500  
> as
> a P router.  Maybe MPLSoGRE would work?  Or using the 5505 as a
> bridge?   If they are both Ethernet, then just trunk things through.
>
> Phil
>
> On Jan 18, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Brandon Price wrote:
>
>> Guys, I apologize if this is a lame-brain question but I am new to
>> MPLS...
>>
>> We have a pretty simple MPLS VPN setup comprised of the following 3
>> routers:
>>
>> PE1 <------> P <-----> PE2
>>
>> PE2 is a new router we are transitioning customers to.
>> PE1 is 7206VXR 12.4(17)
>> PE2 is CAT6513/SUP720-3B 12.2(18)SXF12 the P router is a Cat5500
>> catos6.4(23a)  / RSM ios12.2(46a)
>>
>>
>> the P to PE2 link is a 1GB link on a WS-X5410 blade.
>> According to cisco's Catalyst Jumbo Frame documentation this blade
>> does not support a larger mtu than 1500.
>> However if you enable dot1q trunking yet transmit on the native VLAN
>> the switch will accept an additional 4 bytes.
>>
>> My question is, since the P router will always be the penultimate hop
>> in this layout ? will having room for just 1 label be sufficient?
>>
>> Also the RSM in the cat5500 only supports TDP for label  
>> distribution ?
>> Any potential drawbacks to this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Brandon Price
>> Sterling Communications Inc.
>>
>> /31 <--- The Subnet Formally Known as "Unusable"
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>