[j-nsp] L2 VPN question

[Laura Serrano]

Martin Mogensen wrote:
> 
> Gary's solutions is what I had in mind. It's exactly the same config as 
> we use for ethernet interfaces if you replace "frame-relay" with "vlan", 
> "dlci" with "vlan" and add vlan-tagging on the physical interface.
> 
> Laura,
> Are you using dlci's from the correct ranges? (1-511 for the IP unit and 
> 512+ for the PE-CE unit).

Ups!, I din't know it, sorry!, as you says, it was the problem.

Thanks to eveybody!!

-- Laura

> /martin
> 
> Gary Tate wrote:
> 
>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
>