From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Wed Nov 01 2006 - 11:58:12 ART
1. The leaking of this isn't supported due to the complexity of the trees
that may evolve here. If you don't use Cisco's MVPN concept and rely on GRE
under customer control it IS possible to do Internet-based multicast. It's
just not elegant. That's the issue all SPs have with it. Scalability and
elegance.
2. PIM exchanges information on groups that are being used and trees that
are formed. MSDP exchanges information on groups that COULD be used and
source locations. So they are really two different concepts and necessary
for Inter-AS operation.
You use the multicast boundary (or bsr-border) to establish a border for
your private groups and auto-rp/BSR elections. That keeps your tree
separate from everyone else's.
There is a "commserv" list on GroupStudy that is for the CCIE SP lab, you
may check that out.
HTH,
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE
#153, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
IPExpert VP - Curriculum Development
IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
smorris@ipexpert.com
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Koen
Zeilstra
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 5:00 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: inter vpn multicast and inter AS/MD multicast
Hi Group,
I have 2 interesting (I hope) multicast issues.
1. inter VPN multicast
Imagine a MPLS/VPN based network. In short: Cisco supports MVPN's by
encapsulating customer traffic in multicast GRE tunnels on the PE's.
Exchanging mcast traffic with the internet or with other customers is not an
option according to Cisco:
[quote]
Currently, only a single MVRF is supported per customer.
This limitation precludes the customer also receiving Internet or any other
outside domain's Multicast traffic.
[/quote]
Did anyone succeed in finding a solution for this? Unicast traffic is
'leaked' by importing and exporting RD's via RT's.
Maybe such a solution can be created for multicast as well?
Or maybe another workaround can be found by using an extra router which
participates in both VPN's. In the case of the senders being located all
over the different customer sites this would result in an extra router for
each PE, which is not really an option.
2. inter-AS multicast
Cisco's inter-AS multicast solution is based on RP syncing state information
via MSDP. In most cases an AS is also a multicast domain. The question is:
What determines the domain borders. Is that the absence of a PIM
neighborship relation or the presence of 'ip multicast boundary'. In most
examples I find both 'ip pim sparse-mode' AND 'ip multicast boundary'
present on the interface facing the other AS.
IMHO talking PIM with another AS should not be necessary. Within the AS and
MD (Multicast Domain) PIM exchanges receiver information. Between AS-es MSDP
takes care of this, then why run PIM on border interfaces as well??
Any thoughts on both points?
btw: Are there plans on creating a CCIE Service Provider list or are those
questions still on-topic within the R&S list?
thanks for your reply!
Cheers,
Koen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 01 2006 - 08:05:44 ART