[c-nsp] Central Services Topology - Design question

[Harivishnu Abhilash]

Classification:Confidential

Thanks ! That was the answer I was looking to get confirmation on :).   I have some static route which will be using aggregate Label (VRF Table label)...
So we may need to force all the prefixes (including the static ) to use  per prefix label.

Ta,

-----Original Message-----
From: Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> 
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 10:04 AM
To: Harivishnu Abhilash <Harivishnu.Abhilash at mannai.com.qa>
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Re: Re: [c-nsp] Central Services Topology - Design question

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 04:00, Harivishnu Abhilash <Harivishnu.Abhilash at mannai.com.qa> wrote:

> Thanks. As long as SPOKES won't import other SPOKES, Exported RT values - This (even if we have SPOKE VRF's in same PE) should NOT cause SPOKE-SPOKE traffic to bypass the HUB right ? From the SPOKE perspective the routes imports will be / should be from the HUB VRF only. My initial concern was of hair-pinning of SPOKE TO SPOKE TRAFFIC  from the HUB VRF.

You addressed your concern perfectly, as long as you do not use table-label solution, the packet will go all the way to the CE, however you still need to maintain configuration in CE which forces packet to  FW instead of returning back to PE.
So once you have the config, double check the VPN label is pointing out to CE, and you're golden.


--
  ++ytti

This email is classified as Confidential by Harivishnu Abhilash
Disclaimer: This electronic message and all contents contain information from Mannai Corporation which may be privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from discloser. The information is intended to be for the addressee only. If you are not addressee, any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error please notify the sender immediately and destroy the original and all copies.