[c-nsp] ISP / MPLS "POP" design

[Aaron]

i contain my internet uplinks and my customer public subnet interfaces on
customer facing routers all within a vrf.

The router to router connections throughout my network core are all mpls
enabled and are 10.x.x.x addressed...and those all reside in what is known
as the default/global vrf (really no vrf at all, just the core igp table)

So again, all the public ip space and internet uplinks are all contained
within a vrf.

Throughout my network I have all my pe's (customer facing pe's and internet
facing dual pe's) all have 2, yes only 2, bgp neighbor sessions.  One to rr
cluster node 1 and the other to rr cluster node 2.  (those 2 rr cluster
nodes are of course what makes up my single rr cluster).

Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of
CiscoNSP List
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 2:54 PM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] ISP / MPLS "POP" design

Hi,

Hoping someone can provide some "best practice" advise on an ISP/MPLS
design.

Customer's would have a mix of vrf and Internet tails

POP "A" has 2 x 7200's (PE's) and 2 x 6500's (Ps') - Both 7200's have a
single IPTransit service(Full BGP table) to different upstreams.

7200's and 6500's would be connected (physically) via a full mesh, with MPLS
enabled on p-t-p links

IGP(OSPF) on all p-t-p links, and only carry loopback IP's and p-t-p link
IP's iBGP under VPNv4 for MP-BGP (vrf IP's) with the 2 6500's as route
reflectors

The part Im unsure of is the "global" iBGP (For customer "Internet" IP's) -
Would the 6500's also be route reflectors here? And with regards to the full
BGP tables on the 7200's, would the 7200's only send default route to the
6500's?

Any suggestions/comments are greatly appreciated.


 		 	   		  
_______________________________________________
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/