From: Joe Rinehart (jjrinehart@hotmail.com)
Date: Sun Sep 11 2005 - 00:27:40 GMT-3
Exactly, I learned this point because one of my routers was having memory
problems (a PE running MPLS, OSPF and MBGP) so I killed OSPF on the PE
routers and tried to use default routes into the P core. It didnt work, and
after thinking a bit I realized it was because the P core was not seeing the
routes. I tried doing the whole core and PE's with static routes and it
worked. It's amazing what you pick up when you start peeling back the
layers. Like ogres, MPLS has layers :)
Joe Rinehart
CCIE #14256, CCNP, CCDP
Data Network Consultant
AT&T Pacific Northwest Enterprise Markets
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com>
To: "'Richard Dumoulin'" <Richard.Dumoulin@vanco.fr>; "'Joe Rinehart'"
<jjrinehart@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2005 7:35 PM
Subject: RE: Cisco MPLS
> That's not the point of the 2547 stuff. There are two labels. One is an
> inner label that is used by the PE's. The PE devices need to be MBGP
peers
> and have all that exciting information going on. The P routers only need
to
> know how to get from one PE to the other PE via whatever routing protocol
> you choose to use (ISIS, OSPF, etc.).
>
> You can build an LSP table as long as you know where to go. So they just
> need to know where to go. Typical deployments on the Juniper P routers
will
> involve MPLS and RSVP families, but they'll remain pleasantly ignorant of
> all the MBGP stuff.
>
> HTH,
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Richard Dumoulin
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2005 10:14 PM
> To: 'swm@emanon.com'; 'Joe Rinehart'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE : Cisco MPLS
>
> Take the example of an ISP using an MPLS backbone. Will Juniper P routers
> need all the routes to create the LSP table? We all know that this is not
> the case with Cisco. What about the others?
>
> -- Richard
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Scott Morris [mailto:swm@emanon.com] Envoyi : dimanche 11 septembre
> 2005 04:05 @ : Richard Dumoulin; 'Joe Rinehart'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Objet : RE: Cisco MPLS
>
> The LSP "routing table" is a different list all together. You CAN have
BGP
> routes present, but it's certainly not necessary to have your customer
> routes present.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Richard Dumoulin
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2005 9:19 PM
> To: 'Joe Rinehart'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE : Cisco MPLS
>
> I heard that on a Juniper based MPLS network, the BGP networks needed to
be
> present on the P routing tables. Would be nice if anyone could confirm or
> not by having a look at the routing table...
>
> -- Richard
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Joe Rinehart [mailto:jjrinehart@hotmail.com] Envoyi : dimanche 11
> septembre 2005 02:12 @ : Richard Dumoulin; ccielab@groupstudy.com Objet :
> Re: Cisco MPLS
>
> Yes, I realize that but I was pointing out how the architecture works in
> general, most notably the IGP vs. BGP functionality. Even if you do not
> create MBGP VPNs the routing behavior is the same, with the IGP knowing
ONLY
> core routes and BGP just at the edges. Both protocols run separately with
> no real interaction...
>
> And as far as the AT&T network goes, yes there is a large Cisco component,
> particularly on the edges, but Avici routers are operating at the core.
The
> architecture is independent of the actual platforms....
>
> Joe Rinehart
> CCIE #14256, CCNP, CCDP
> Data Network Consultant
> AT&T Pacific Northwest Enterprise Markets
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Dumoulin" <Richard.Dumoulin@vanco.fr>
> To: "'Joe Rinehart'" <jjrinehart@hotmail.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2005 2:12 PM
> Subject: RE : Cisco MPLS
>
>
> > But AT&T are using Cisco routers I believe. Also please note that I am
> > not talking about MPVPN but just about the way BGP network
> > destinations are label switched,
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > -- Richard
> >
> > -----Message d'origine-----
> > De : Joe Rinehart [mailto:jjrinehart@hotmail.com] Envoyi : samedi 10
> > septembre 2005 01:07 @ : Richard Dumoulin; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Objet : Re: Cisco MPLS
> >
> > Anyone feel free to jump in if I am way off base here...
> >
> > It's pretty much just a function of how the routing is set up...I
> > created
> a
> > mini-MPLS network on my lab rack and really was surprised to see how
> > the mechanics all work, especially as I tried to mimic how we have it
> > set up
> at
> > AT&T. The feature you are referring to is sometimes called a
> > route-free core. The label switched core itself doesn't have any
> > knowledge of edge
> (or
> > MPLS VPN) routes at all, they are clueless of anything outside the
> backbone
> > itself. Usually an IGP like OSPF or ISIS is run between the P nodes
> > in
> the
> > core and includes the PE devices too. I had one router get all buggy
> > because of short memory so I verified just using static routing across
> > the simulated backbone and that worked too. The core just uses IGP
> > and
> internal
> > routes and does the label switching from PE to PE.
> >
> > The magic is at the PE, it's pretty much doing all the heavy lifting.
> > The PE runs BGP at the edge only, peering with the CE (using eBGP) and
> > other PE's (using iBGP), and it's also responsible for creating the
> > MPLS VPN's using Route Distinguishers and Multiprotocol BGP. The core
> > doesnt know, doesnt care and doesnt play with BGP or the VPN's, it
> > just pushes
> traffic...
> >
> > The same would apply to Internet routes, as the BGP on the edge/PE
> > routers would know all of it, advertise routes, and such, but once
> > passed to the core P routers it would be label switched....
> >
> > It really is cool fascinating stuff.....
> >
> > Joe Rinehart
> > CCIE #14256, CCNP, CCDP
> > Data Network Consultant
> > AT&T Pacific Northwest Enterprise Markets
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Richard Dumoulin" <Richard.Dumoulin@vanco.fr>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 2:03 PM
> > Subject: Cisco MPLS
> >
> >
> > > There is a feature in MPLS that I find powerful and it is the
> possibility
> > of
> > > building an Internet backbone with 160000 routes present only in the
> > > PEs routing table. I was wondering if this was only a Cisco feature
> > > or do
> the
> > Ps
> > > of other vendors also support this like Juniper for example?
> > >
> > > Thx
> > >
> > > -- Richard
> > >
> > >
> > > ********************************************************************
> > > ** Any opinions expressed in the email are those of the individual
> > > and not
> > necessarily the company. This email and any files transmitted with it
> > are confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If
> > you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for
> > delivering it to the intended recipient, be advised that you have
> > received this email in error and that any dissemination, distribution,
> > copying or use is strictly prohibited.
> > >
> > > If you have received this email in error, or if you are concerned
> > > with
> the
> > content of this email please e-mail to: e-security.support@vanco.info
> > >
> > > The contents of an attachment to this e-mail may contain software
> viruses
> > which could damage your own computer system. While the sender has
> > taken every reasonable precaution to minimise this risk, we cannot
> > accept liability for any damage which you sustain as a result of
> > software
> viruses.
> > You should carry out your own virus checks before opening any
> > attachments
> to
> > this e-mail.
> > > ********************************************************************
> > > **
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________________
> > > ___ Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > _ Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 02 2005 - 14:40:14 GMT-3