From: Wes Stevens (wrsteve33-gsccie@yahoo.com)
Date: Wed Jan 14 2009 - 23:12:09 ARST
How far do you think this will scale? Not enough for most networks. It is nice to not have the routing points on the PE routers but it does not scale. Also you lose the sudo any to any that an l3vpn provides. If you are going to do voice this is very useful for CAC. If you overlay the dmvpn you are back to hub and spoke and CAC gets real tricky.
----- Original Message ----
From: Roman Rodichev <roman@iementor.com>
To: Fake Name <fname84@gmail.com>
Cc: Cisco certification <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 12:06:11 PM
Subject: Re: DMVPN question
I'd recommend setting up dmvpn without protection on top of mpls. Run the same routing protocol (eigrp preferred) on the mpls dmvpn and on the Internet dmvpn. Rely on delay metric. Use phase 3. MPLS provider will be only responsible to route pe-ce /30s. You control routing.
On Jan 13, 2009, at 9:59 AM, "Fake Name" <fname84@gmail.com> wrote:
> If I want to use dmvpn to be a backup for the already existing mpls network
> where each location has a connection to the internet and mpls connections to
> eachother what is the best practice? Would it be configuring dmvpn and
> using the same routing protocol instance between everything and playing with
> the metrics to make sure traffic is going over the mpls network and not the
> dmvpn when its up and when it does down to use the dmvpn backup? Or would
> it be using another routing protocol for the dmvpn network with a higher
> administrative distance so that routes dont go in the table till the mpls
> network is down?
>
> Please offer some advice on best practices?
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:43:38 ARST