[j-nsp] vpls question

[Amarjeet Singh]

Hello James - If you are using BGP as signalling protocol and already have
"multihoming" & "site-preference" knobs configured for both PE's (PE1, PE2)
then you are pretty much done to prevent loops.

Could you advise the reason why you want to run OSPF b/w Provider routers
(PE1, PE2) and Router behind CE in L2 services scenario?

Br, Amarjeet


> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 13:23:19 +0200
> From: james list <jameslist72 at gmail.com>
> To: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [j-nsp] vpls question
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAEcMOL4LexKyDy-vyr-hAQWBu8fFYLi6nHNPc2o+C5SgEvdXoQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> I have a VPLS multi-homed environment with two MX routers (PE1 and PE2)
> connected to a single ethernet switch (CE1). I have PE1 configured with
> site-preference as "primary" and PE2 as "backup".
>
>
> Behind the CE1 there is a router running OSPF with both MX (on irb
> interface).
>
>
> My goal is to have:
>
> 1)    Multihoming to prevent loops
>
> 2)    Let the router run two OSPF neighbor with both PE and not just one
> with the primary PE.
>
> I?m wondering if using:
>
>
> set routing-instances XXXX protocols vpls connectivity-type irb
>
>
> instead of the default (connectivity-type ce) could give me the option to
> reach my goal number 2) and if I can introduce any drawback.
>
>
> Or if there is another solution keeping 1).
>
>
> I don?t have a lab to test?
>
>
> Any help/feedback is really appreciated.
>
>
> Greetings
>
> James
>
>
>