[j-nsp] MVPN over Juniper PE and Cisco P

[Mark Tinka]

On Wednesday, December 28, 2011 03:05:16 PM Muhd Safwan 
wrote:

> I'm working on requirement to enable MVPN over Juniper PE
> and Cisco P.

Based on the link you've posted, you seem to be bringing up 
an NG-MVPN (BGP control plane [for PIM mechanisms], MPLS 
data plane [using p2mp RSVP or mLDP]).

> But there's a part that i'm not sure which is the
> "inet-mvpn signaling" and i'm not sure what cisco is
> using to match the configuration.

Currently, Cisco do not support the MCAST-NLRI AFI used for 
NG-MVPN's. You will need a Juniper route reflector to get 
this to work.

Cisco are planning to support NG-MVPN in the ASR9000, but 
that is only coming in Q1'13. Besides, that is IOS XR, and 
I'm guessing your route reflector is IOS.

There is no commitment from Cisco, at this time, when IOS 
will get NG-MVPN - or at the very least, when IOS will 
receive support for this NLRI so that it can, at the very 
least, act as a route reflector.

You have two options:

	a) Keep your existing iBGP sessions on the Cisco
	   route reflectors and introduce a cheap Juniper
	   router to do the MVPN piece only.

	b) Migrate the Cisco route reflector to a Juniper.
	   But be mindful of the amount of DRAM in the
	   cheapest Juniper routers, and make sure it's
	   enough to handle both your Unicast and Multicast
	   AFI's.


We were using Cisco 7201's as route reflectors. But when we 
were introducing NG-MVPN, the options were to either 
introduce an M7i for NG-MVPN piece, or migrate to a single 
Juniper platform. Well, we moved to a Juniper M120 for route 
reflection (I know, I know, hehe...).

> We also don't have any
> Multiservice PIC or Adaptive Service PIC.

Unless you have an MX-series router, you will need this in 
order to get PIM to work on the Sender PE routers. I'm not 
sure whether your Sender CE routers are Juniper, but if they 
are, you will also need that. If you have Cisco Sender CE 
routers, then tunneling of PIM Registers is included in the 
hardware.

I'm not sure how the J-series supports this (in software, 
perhaps), so can't say if that's your platform.

Without an MS-PIC, you won't be able to handle PIM Registers 
coming in from the Sender CE router. But the beauty with NG-
MVPN is that you don't need MS-PIC's for PIM on any other 
router in the topology other than the Sender PE routers. So 
it's not like you need to spend lots of money populating MS-
PIC's across your whole backbone.

That said, if you look through the archives, you'll find a 
rant from me about how Juniper are sending two copies of the 
same Multicast packet when 'vrf-table-label' is being used 
for the MVPN. To fix this, you'll need to use a 'vt-' 
interface instead of 'vrf-table-label', which requires an 
MS-PIC but sends only one copy of the Multicast packet 
(duh!). This isn't an issue for us, today, as the majority 
of our Receiver PE routers are MX480's (which have a Tunnel 
PIC integrated in the Trio-based line cards), and the few 
M320's/T320's we have all have MS-PIC's.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/juniper-nsp/attachments/20111228/6ecaf807/attachment.sig>