[c-nsp] ASR opinions..

[Robert Raszuk]

Hi Adam,

The discussion is about control plane RRs.

Therefor in control plane RRs you do not need to have any LSP on those
nor populate 3107 to RIB/LFIB. A default will work equally well for Next
Hop Tracking to consider your BGP next hops as valid in any address
family (if that is your concern).

Of course if you would set next hop self on such RRs and start/end LSP
there making it to be a dataplane box of course you better feed the LFIB
but not otherwise.

Cheers,
R.


> Right the default route would work nicely with bgp free core and no IGP on the Intra-AS-RRs
> But it won't work for Inter-AS-RRs
> Because you don't wan the local AS IGP to be "polluted" with the remote ASNs PEs and Inter-AS-RRs loopbacks so you rather want to carry those in bgp-afi-ipv4 + labels
> In this case you need the bgp-ipv4-afi to feed the FIB and LFIB on the Inter-AS-RRs
> As you need the end to end LSPs in order to setup sessions between Inter-AS-RRs in different ASNs
> 
> 
> adam 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Mark Tinka
> Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 6:33 AM
> To: Mack McBride
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR opinions..
> 
> On Tuesday, August 30, 2011 03:08:17 AM Mack McBride wrote:
> 
>> I would recommend a default to the core from the device
>> to achieve ping/traceroute.
> 
> Not necessary - the majority of troubleshooting cases will 
> be for customers in the network. We run a BGP-free core, but 
> the route reflectors have direct access to the edge, so IP 
> forwarding would suffice.
> 
> Mark.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> 
>