[j-nsp] L2 VPN question

[Gary Tate]

I'm not sure what you mean by impossible. Maybe you can send the  
configuration you are trying and the version of JunOS

[edit]
gtate at vpn02# show interfaces so-2/1/0
encapsulation frame-relay-ccc;
unit 101 {
     dlci 101;
     family inet {
         address 1.1.1.1/30;
     }
}
unit 512 {
     encapsulation frame-relay-ccc;
     dlci 512;
}

[edit]
gtate at vpn02# commit
commit complete

This works fine.
Gary

On Aug 5, 2004, at 3:59 AM, Laura Serrano wrote:

> Hi Martin,
>
> this is Laura, from rediris. As Miguel Angel tells you, we want to use  
> the same link between CE and PE router for the IP and l2 circuit  
> traffic.
>
> Please, correct me if I am wrong.
>
> For definition, we need to configure an CCC circuit between CE and PE  
> router, don't we?. Well, we are currently defining a test VPN scenario  
> in our production network without affecting to the IP traffic, that  
> is: to use the same SONET link (PE-CE) to IP and l2circuit traffic.
>
> I am trying to configure different units under the same physical  
> interface, but we have a problem:
>
> At the physical level we can configure framerelay-ccc, ciscohdlc-ccc  
> and ppp-ccc, but if you choose any of *.ccc encapsulations at this  
> level, you can't configure family inet in the logical unit interface.
>
> Another possibility, I thought about, is to configure "frame-relay" at  
> the physical level and define two different logical unit, one for IP  
> traffic and frame-relay encapsulation and other for l2circuit with  
> frame-relay-ccc encapsulation, but it is impossible too :-/
>
> Any comment, any idea, any options? Thanks in advanced
>
> Regards!
>
> -- Laura
>
>
>
> Martin Mogensen wrote:
>> Miguel Angel Sotos wrote:
>>> Hi all,     we are configuring some L2VPN stuff in Juniper routers.
>>>
>>> There's a POS interface between PE end CE.
>>> Can we use (we are using Martini) in the same POS interface, *-ccc  
>>> encapsulation and other type of encapsulations that permits
>>> familiy inet ??
>>> In that case, which one?
>>>
>>> Or, have I to use the whole interface for ccc based VPNs??
>>> (and not IP traffic)??
>>>
>>> At the end, what i want to do is to use
>>> at the same time L2 circuits and L3 family inet traffic in the same  
>>> interface.
>>>
>>> Is it possible? or maybe i'm conceptually wrong.....
>> We have deployed this type of Martini layer 2 circuits with both IP  
>> and layer2 circuit terminations on the same physical interface  
>> towards a CE, but we have only used GE/10GE interfaces and vlan-ccc  
>> encapsulation so far. Using POS interfaces is more tricky.
>> In order to run both IP traffic and to terminate one or more layer2  
>> circuit on the same physical interface you need to use an  
>> encapsulation type that support the use of more than one unit  
>> (subinterface) on the physical interface. You can then use one unit  
>> for IP and one or more to units for CCC to enable layer2 circuit  
>> terminations towards the CE.
>> Note that there are limitations on which unit numbers you can use  
>> with CCC - some units will be reserved when you apply *-ccc  
>> encapsulatiom on the physical interface:
>> http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos61/feature-guide 
>> -61/html/fg-l2circuit6.html For POS, you should be able to use  
>> frame-relay-ccc encapsulation to acheive what you need if you would  
>> like to go that way.
>> /martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>