[c-nsp] Running OSPF on PE-to-CE

[Mark Tinka]

On Sunday, October 16, 2011 04:02:38 PM ar wrote:

> Can somebody tell me why this route is being prefered?

Not really an answer to your question, but along the same 
subject:

Just curious how many of you are still supporting IGP PE-CE 
routing protocols.

We've effectively stopped, allowing l3vpn customers to talk 
only Static or BGP routing to us.

I know there could be "legacy" circumstances, but are you 
still encouraging it, even today? I know earlier in the 
century, a major concern was the number of software RDB's 
available to routing protocols such as OSPF, in IOS, which 
had an impact on how well you could scale VRF-aware OSPF. 
But even if scale could have gone up, an IGP for PE-CE 
routing just doesn't feel right (practical problems 
notwithstanding, of course).

Thoughts?

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20111016/dc8462c2/attachment.pgp>