[c-nsp] VPLS Autodiscovery Redundant CE

[Mohammad Khalil]

Thanks a lot Nick for your comments

My customer is heavily deploying VPLS with autodiscovery , if I want to suggest replacement what will be the best options?

Most of the PEs are ASR903 and ASR920 with few ASR9K


BR,

Mohammad


________________________________
From: Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 2:33 PM
To: Mohammad Khalil
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPLS Autodiscovery Redundant CE

Mohammad Khalil wrote:
>  Hi Nick and thanks for the kind reply
>
> You mean something such as below (I tested it yesterday):
>
> l2vpn xconnect context MSSK
>  interworking ethernet
>  member 1.1.1.1 100 encapsulation mpls group GRP priority 9
>  member 3.3.3.3 100 encapsulation mpls group GRP priority 10
>  member GigabitEthernet3 service-instance 100

yes, something like that would be necessary.  I haven't used vpls PE
redundancy myself, so can't confirm whether this configuration will
actually work correctly, but bgp autodiscovery will definitely not work.
 Also, you should think long and hard about whether vpls (with or
without redundancy) is a feature that you want to use in production. It
has a lot of failure modes which can lead to catastrophic network failure.

Also, asciiflow.com is really useful for creating diagrams.

Nick