[j-nsp] BGP RR in MPLS VPN

[Jan Andersson H (AL/EAB)]

Just for clarification: For a RR to announce its learnd VPN-routes, it need to have a valid LSP (or similar AKA BGP NH in inet.3) going back to the loopback of the announcing router hence the LSPs need to go FROM the RR to the PE routers.
//Janne

________________________________

From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net on behalf of Scott Morris
Sent: Mon 10/9/2006 7:07 AM
To: 'senad palislamovic'; 'Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim'; 'Juniper-NSP'
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] BGP RR in MPLS VPN



My assumption (perhaps a bad one) is that the loopbacks (NH) would have
already be learned and stored in inet.3...

For a VPN to be learned, the PE next hop addresses would need to be
contained in inet.3 already.  Or I believe someone else mentioned cheating
using a 0/0 route in inet.3 for mass resolution.

So simply to have the loopback interfaces of PE routers in the inet.3 table
seems like a much better mechanism than having a ton of LSPs going to the RR
devices.

Scott


-----Original Message-----
From: senad palislamovic [mailto:spalislam at yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 12:51 AM
To: swm at emanon.com; 'Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim'; 'Juniper-NSP'
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] BGP RR in MPLS VPN

Scott,

I AFAIK, unless P (RR) has PE's loopbacks (if IBGP) or physical links
(whatever is BGP NH) in its inet.3 table, the VPN routes will be hidden.
Therefore, we do need LSPs from PE to RRs.  Plz, correct me if I am wrong.
It's been a while and can't jump on boxes right now.

HTH,

Senad


--- Scott Morris <swm at emanon.com> wrote:

> No.  The RR will simply pass around routing information.  As long as
> the next-hop IP remains unchanged (PE to PE) then your LSPs have no
> need to go through the RR.
>
> HTH,
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:juniper-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Ihsan
> Junaidi Ibrahim
> Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 7:03 PM
> To: Juniper-NSP
> Subject: [j-nsp] BGP RR in MPLS VPN
>
> Hi all,
>
> Referring to the following terse diagram:
>
> PE1---P---PE2
>
> There exists LSPs to/fro PE1 to PE2 and P functions as RR to both PE1
> and
> PE2 as well as transit LSR. Must LSPs be created from the PEs to the
> RR and vice versa in order to have proper distribution of
> VPN-IPv4 routes?
>
> --
> Thank you for your time,
> Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com <http://mail.yahoo.com/> 

_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp