[f-nsp] TE for the same VLL peers

[Dan Spataro]

Brad,

You cannot force a VLL to take a specific LSP.  You need to convert your VLLs to VPLS, then you will be able to specify a LSP for the VPLS to use.  So for your DR traffic you would need to create a LSP with a primary path over the indirect links then reference that LSP in the VPLS config for your DR VLAN or interface.

Here is an example (you can also create secondary paths and use FRR for failover).



path DR_traffic_path
  to x.x.x.x
  to x.x.x.x
 enable

lsp DR_traffic
  to x.x.x.x
  primary DR_traffic_path
   enable


vpls DR_traffic xxx
  vpls-peer x.x.x.x lsp DR_traffic
  vlan xxx
   tagged ethe x/x






-----Original Message-----
From: foundry-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:foundry-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Brad Fleming
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 12:42 PM
To: foundry-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [f-nsp] TE for the same VLL peers

Hello all,

If you have two VLLs both pointed at the same remote LER is it possible to force one VLL over an indirect path while allowing the other to use a direct path? I don't see options to specify an LSP when provisioning a VLL and TAC informed me that a VLL must be provisioned to the remote router-ID.

In our environment we have two routers that handle several VLLs. Some of the VLLs are of a critical nature (voice) while others are much lower priority (ie: DR data backups). We'd like to allow the voice traffic to travel a direct (but narrow) path while forcing the DR data down a long (but wide) path.

Any help, suggestions, or insight would be appreciated and thanks in advance!

-brad
_______________________________________________
foundry-nsp mailing list
foundry-nsp at puck.nether.net
http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp