RE: MPLS CE, PE definition

Jon,

I read Scott's post twice but have yet to find the part that means "BGP
between 2 boxes offer more flexibility". Maybe he's missed something or
I'm reading too fast :)

HTH,

--------------------------
Kambiz Agahian
CCIE (R&S), CCSI, WAASSE, RSSSE
Technical Instructor
CCBOOTCAMP - Cisco Learning Solutions Partner (CLSP)
Email: kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com
Toll Free: 877-654-2243
International: +1-702-968-5100
Skype: skype:ccbootcamp?call
FAX: +1-702-446-8012
YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
Training And Remote Racks: http://www.ccbootcamp.com

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Joe Astorino
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2010 5:59 AM
To: swm_at_emanon.com; Kambiz Agahian
Cc: Jack Router; CCIE Groupstudy
Subject: Re: MPLS CE, PE definition

Scott -- 100% agreed. Like I said, I do not believe this is a "right or
wrong" answer. We can all argue both sides but what is the point? Some
people seem to like to respond to these sorts of things just for the
sake of arguing. (Shrug)

Thanks for your valuable input!

Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

Regards,

 Joe Astorino - CCIE #24347
Sr. Technical Instructor - IPexpert
Mailto: jastorino_at_ipexpert.com
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Live Assistance, Please visit: www.ipexpert.com/chat
eFax: +1.810.454.0130

IPexpert is a premier provider of Self-Study Workbooks, Video on Demand,
Audio Tools, Online Hardware Rental and Classroom Training for the Cisco
CCIE (R&S, Voice, Security & Service Provider) certification(s) with
training locations throughout the United States, Europe, South Asia and
Australia. Be sure to visit our online communities at
www.ipexpert.com/communities and our public website at www.ipexpert.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Morris <swm_at_emanon.com>
Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 08:47:55
To: Kambiz Agahian<kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com>
Cc: Joe Astorino<jastorino_at_ipexpert.com>; Jack
Router<pan.router_at_gmail.com>; <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
Subject: Re: MPLS CE, PE definition

Managed CE's bring a whole different picture in. It all boils down to
what the SP finds easier (e.g. what translates to less help calls by the
customers and less technician time to work on/fix/tweak/etc). It's a $$
game.
 
 When this all started, by the way, it was (and still may be depending
on the specific equipment/IOS used on the SP edge) a routing-process #
issue. In most devices, there's a maximum of 32 routing processes that
can be used. While we'd love to see the world run OSPF, unfortunately,
each instance is a routing process for the IOS. I believe the new
S-trains (SRD/SRE) and XR versions eliminate this problem and make it
more total-memory rather than process number....
 
 But BGP was the simple common denominator that had to be run anyway,
and offered INTRA-process separation of tables.
 
 So, sorry to rain on things here (as it appears to be a fun contest of
pulling pants down that I'm not particularly interested in) but an SP is
concerned about "reliable" only as much as it translates to lower
operations/support cost. Only the larger customers (commanding that "do
this or I'll pull my $$ to another provider) really get to command the
tweaks and entertaining features. "Normal" MPLS VPN customers have to
do what they are told, or get handed a managed CE router with the phrase
"tough patooties".
 
 The funny thing is that as good network engineers, we can MAKE things
work just about any way till Sunday. But when it comes to making a
replicatable process to roll out en-masse, that logic doesn't hold very
long.
 
 Just my six cents... (I figured I've collected a couple from global
SPs over the years, so I may as well share them here!)
 
 But in design methodology, the funny thing is that there aren't really
"right" answers. There are "what works for me in this particular
situation" answers. So you can both share in being correct (and please
(insert favorite deity here) keep your pants pulled all the way up!).
 
 Scott
 
 
 Kambiz Agahian wrote: Joe, It's actually less flexible and more
resource intensive ;-) but it does offer a couple of major advantages.
Different carriers use different CE-PE routing protocols and if you
interview them you will hear a bunch of different reasons. In the US,
you see the exact same thing. This is somehow like the famous "OSPF or
IS-IS" question...both have their own fans. But what sort of flexibility
do you ever need to have between 2 hops? If you talk to those who are
big BGP fans as a CE-PE they'd mostly talk about the "built-in
redistribution" feature (absolutely true) but at the cost of slower
convergence. I've heard some other reasons like "we only need to hire
BGP guys then!" etc. But what sort of convergence? As an MPLS SP the
only thing that I care about is a reliable, easy to set up, configure
and tshoot link as my PE-CE but as a customer probably you're seeking
some more vital features like "what if my primary link goes down?",
"what if I want to swit!
 
 ch over to a SP2 if SP1 is down?", "what if the IP SLA for jitter keeps
complaining and I prefer to route through SP2?" etc. well, BGP does do
the job but not necessarily in the grace period of time mandated by your
critical applications like Call managers and public servers. Does SP1
care? Probably they don't, especially in the markets that you see some
sort of natural monopoly. But I know some service providers working on
this now. In theory, there are heaps of different options to improve
this experience but at the end of the day you as a customer have to deal
with their sluggish BGP behavior. Juniper is actively working on this,
and Cisco does have some features...but anyway our SP's are far behind;
we're talking about a massive hardware/software upgrade especially if
the feature needs to be configured on both ends. Cheers,
-------------------------- Kambiz Agahian CCIE (R&S), CCSI, WAASSE,
RSSSE Technical Instructor CCBOOTCAMP - Cisco Learning Solutions Partner
(CLSP) !
 
 Email: kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com <mailto:kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com!
> Toll F
ree: 877-654-2243 International: +1-702-968-5100 Skype:
skype:ccbootcamp?call FAX: +1-702-446-8012 YES! We take Cisco Learning
Credits! Training And Remote Racks: http://www.ccbootcamp.com
-----Original Message----- From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com
<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com> [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of Joe Astorino Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2010 6:14 PM To: Jack Router Cc:
Kambiz Agahian; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com <mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
Subject: Re: MPLS CE, PE definition PS -- I used to work for a large
international company with a global MPLS environment. It was much like
what you are describing -- managed CE routers that ran BGP to the PE
routers. We had only read access on the managed CE routers.
Unfortunately, all of our sites relied basically on static routing
(sigh) so on the CE router they basically just advertised those static
routes into BGP. Similarly, in your setup the CE router probably learns
a bunch of EIGRP routes and they likely just adve!
 
 rtise them into BGP with the network command....or maybe redistribute
depending on what exactly they want to accomplish. On Sat, May 1, 2010
at 9:10 PM, Joe Astorino &lt;jastorino_at_ipexpert.com&gt;
<mailto:jastorino_at_ipexpert.com> wrote: BGP makes it easier and more
flexible for your provider. Many providers are not going to run an IGP
with you at all, and that is what you are seeing. Not having at least
read only access to their managed router is kind of ridiculous
though...but that is a business decision that likely needs negotiated
(AKA Layer 8 problem) : ) On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Jack Router
&lt;pan.router_at_gmail.com&gt; <mailto:pan.router_at_gmail.com> wrote: Thanks
to all for explanations. What is the benefit of running separate CE-PE
protocol, instead of running my EIGRP up to the PE ? -----Original
Message----- From: Kambiz Agahian [mailto:kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com] Sent:
1-May-10 19:52 To: Ryan West; Jack Router Cc: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
<mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy!
 
 .com> Subject: RE: MPLS CE, PE definition Ryan, That box is a !
 pure "ma
naged CE". When they say BGP they don't mean MP-BGP, more than likely
they just mean BGP (the CE-PE routing protocol). So probably what you
see is something like this: EIGRP <-> BGP <-> MP-BGP <-> BGP <-> EIGRP.
You can bother them by asking about the best convergence time they can
offer with their BGP MPLS peer :-D and then ask them to offer BFD on top
of that! HTH -------------------------- Kambiz Agahian CCIE (R&S), CCSI,
WAASSE, RSSSE Technical Instructor CCBOOTCAMP - Cisco Learning Solutions
Partner (CLSP) Email: kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com
<mailto:kagahian_at_ccbootcamp.com> Toll Free: 877-654-2243 International:
+1-702-968-5100 Skype: skype:ccbootcamp?call FAX: +1-702-446-8012 YES!
We take Cisco Learning Credits! Training And Remote Racks:
http://www.ccbootcamp.com -----Original Message----- From:
nobody_at_groupstudy.com <mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
[mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Ryan West Sent: Saturday,
May 01, 2010 8:09 AM To: Jack Router Cc: ccielab_at_groupst!
 
 udy.com <mailto:ccielab_at_groupstudy.com> Subject: Re: MPLS CE, PE
definition CE implies no locally running MPLS and not neccessarily
customer controlled. Sent from handheld. On May 1, 2010, at 10:58 AM,
"Jack Router" &lt;pan.router_at_gmail.com&gt; <mailto:pan.router_at_gmail.com>
wrote: Hello, We have an MPLS service managed by a provider. They have a
router on our location and call it a CE. We do not have access to it.
When I asked to show me the config they refused because this router runs
BGP and contains confidential information. Provider confirmed that this
router redistributes our EIGRP into their BGP. By my definition this is
a PE even if located in our location, or am I missing something ? Thank,
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sun May 02 2010 - 11:33:26 ART