Re: MPLS VPN: Why two lables?

Yes, yes, yes! You are right.

Are there any other protocol, supporting RD and label transfer?

On 3 July 2011 22:15, Paul Negron <negron.paul_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, what you are describing is how Carrier Supporting Carrier is
> achieved between the Intermediate BGP nodes. Unfortunately, it is not
> practical for All of the nodes to run MP-BGP and also remove the default RT
> filter. It would completely defeat the purpose. Is it possible? YES. Is it
> practical? No.
>
> Paul
> --
> Paul Negron
> CCIE# 14856 CCSI# 22752
> Senior Technical Instructor
> www.micronicstraining.com
>
>
>
>> From: Vladimir Osipenko <tiffolk_at_gmail.com>
>> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 22:06:11 +0400
>> To: Paul Negron <negron.paul_at_gmail.com>
>> Cc: marc abel <marcabel_at_gmail.com>, <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>> Subject: Re: MPLS VPN: Why two lables?
>>
>> If we had no overlapping, we could do MPLS VPN with one label, isn't it?
>>
>>> It's like asking why we use 2 encapsulations for QinQ.
>>
>> Oh well, yeah it sounds like that =)))
>>
>>> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=04678905
>>
>> No, it is closed from public =)
>>
>> On 3 July 2011 21:47, Paul Negron <negron.paul_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It's just like the ATM days. You need one label to represent the Virtual
>>> Path and one label to represent the Virtual Connection.
>>>
>>> A Tunnel within a Tunnel.
>>>
>>
>>>
>>> Paul
>>> --
>>> Paul Negron
>>> CCIE# 14856 CCSI# 22752
>>> Senior Technical Instructor
>>> www.micronicstraining.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: marc abel <marcabel_at_gmail.com>
>>>> Reply-To: marc abel <marcabel_at_gmail.com>
>>>> Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2011 12:13:49 -0500
>>>> To: Vladimir Osipenko <tiffolk_at_gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: MPLS VPN: Why two lables?
>>>>
>>>> The biggest efficiency with the labels might be that P routers don't
>>>> have to speak BGP, they just need to know the routes to the BGP
>>>> speaking PE routers.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Vladimir Osipenko <tiffolk_at_gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi, Guys!
>>>>>
>>>>> Despite reading books and articles, I simply don't get it: why we must
>>>>> use two lables for MPLS VPN instead of using one label, but without
>>>>> PHP?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it because every P router will need to know customer routes? Any
>>>>> other reasons?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sun Jul 03 2011 - 22:27:58 ART