[j-nsp] tunneling on MX

[Sean Clarke]

Marlon Duksa wrote:
> I remember running mcast traffic on MX without converting a port to a
> 'tunneling' module. 
Only if you are running native multicast as a receiver.
Or your DR is connected directly to the RP
Or you're running PIM-SSM

If the DR and RP are different then you need tunnel  to encapsulate.
I don't know your topology so can't comment.

However if you need to encapsulate/decapsulate PIM messages you MUST 
have a port in tunnel mode

> Why is Juniper saying that for multicast tunnels (mt),
> this tunneling service on a port is necessary?
>   

Yes this is more for draft-rosen ... any rosen / or NG-multicast 
solution needs either mt- or vt- interfaces, which needs tunneling hardware.
This is not native multicast any more

> I also remember running VPLS without it (no-tunneling-service command). Why
> do I need this tunneling mode  than on MX?
>
>   
You don't - you can also run in no-tunnel mode

> I guess the tunneling service provide acceleration, but does that mean that
> it should work even without it, just that performance will be lower?
>
> Also, on M-series, why do you have to have MS-PIC? Can all the tunneling and
> processing be done on the control plane CPU? The performance would suffer I
> understand, but in some cases we don't have a lot of traffic in tunnels.
>
>   
MS-PIC, AS-PIC, tunnel PIC... any tunneling and you'll need one of them .
MS-PIC scales better than AS-PIC - which scales better than tunnel PIC

Don't do it on the RE, unless you want problems.
cheers

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