advice in MPLS RR

[SaeedBakh_2]

we want to know the best design for the Roure Reflectors for the attached network,we need to consider country redundancy in our design so if any country down still we have access through other country.

previously there is no Italy site and there is no Kuwait site, and all the PE’s everywhere peer with the two  P’s in Qatar and also all the links from the PE’s connected directly to Qatar,(the diagram is just now where build two new sites Italy and Kuwait and we want to shift some of the remote PE’s  links to Italy and Kuwait as the diagram show) ,

the two P’s in Qatar in cluster id 100,

because of the new sites introduced and the some of the links migrated from connected from Qatar to Italy and Kuwait, you can see some of the PE’s connected directly to Italy and Kuwait. i think we can not  leave them as same as previously to peer to the two Qatar P’s (RR’s).

the point here if the whole Qatar country is down ,should we have country redundancy,

so should we consider the other P’s in Italy and Kuwait to be RR’s, and how this will be done , because if we consider P’s Italy RR’s in one cluster and same for Kuwait, some of the PE’s site connected to different countries for example Egypt PE’s connected to Italy and Qatar,And if we configure Bahrain and London RR’s in different Clusted id , I do not think that Egypt PE for example will peer with RR's in different Cluster id ,what should the solution here.

Regards,

Ahmed

[Reza Sharifi]

Ahmed,

You can add 2 more RR to your network.  You can for example put the 2 routers in KSA in one cluster (1.1.1.1) and the 2 routers in Italy in a different cluster (2.2.2.2). This way Kuwait, Qatar and Oman can peer with both clusters. It would be the same on the other sites with Egypt and Lebanon peering with both clusters. You would also need to have cluster 1 and 2 routers peer fully meshed.

HTH

Reza

[Marwan ALshawi]

Hi Ahmed,

with multiple BGP RR you need first to plan which RR country to be redundant to the other from iBGP session point of view

then you can have that RR router (cluster to form a iBGP session with the other P/RR/country/cluster ) for route redundancy ) non RR client iBGP session here with the other RRs

on the other hand you already setup RR/BGP cluster ID per country for RR redundancy with RR client so you can get two level of redundancy

HTH

if helpful Rate

[SaeedBakh_2]

Hi Marwan , sorry i did not get you clearly,

Reza & Marwan, but what i understood that we can not have same PE peer with two RR's from different cluster.

can you give more detail how the peer will per device for example PE1 egypt and PE1 from Qatar,

how many BGP peers per PE and how will be the peering between the RR's

[Marwan ALshawi]

why can not ?

yes you can

for example

PE1 site1 to P1/RR1 and to P2/RR2  where each of those P/RRs belong to diffrent RR cluster you can use metrecs for example for route prefrence within your backbone network

see bellow links for more info

http://bgpconcepts.blogspot.com/2008/11/bgp-multiple-rrs-within-cluster.html

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=00tZxiDYdlQC&pg=PA268&lpg=PA268&dq=redundant+BGP+RRs&source=bl&ots=BqCt_vvW9U&sig=cgHMO04uKZ4ex7_QnCwfnnGwaI8&hl=en&ei=C4o-TvDQDovorQex0MgI&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=redun...

good CSC discussion to have a look at

https://supportforums.cisco.com/thread/2060011

HTH

if helpful Rate

[Mohamed Sobair]

Hi Ahmad,

Globally in the MPLS Network, you dont require RRs. RRs required and mostly deployed within intra-domain MPLS cloud ,, because it provides more Scalability when designing MPLS. each P router is and RR for the local site it belongs to, and both RRs can have normal IBGP session between them to accept and advertise Ebgp prefixes it learns.

So, in your design, KSA , Italy , and all other Country sites would be designed with different seperate RR cluster IDs for Intra MPLS connectivity, however, when KSA peers with Egypt or Qatar for example, it doesnt require RR since they each have and peer with different AS, this is called (Inter-AS) or Peering Architecture in MPLS.

The Cluster is simply prevent BGP routing loop that may occur within a BGP Network, thats why KSA for example should have thier P routers which acts as RR as well be in the same Cluster by configuring the same cluster-id on both BGP RR Speakers.

Looking at your design, you already have Country redundancy, by having each country peers with two different Countries in the MPLS. you just need to make sure you have redundancy INtra-AS MPLS for each local country similar to KSA and Kuwait sites.

Let me know if you got it or need further details,

Regards,

Mohamed

[Marwan ALshawi]

Ahmed,

i think Mohamed advise more reasonable from design prospective which is similar to the idea i tried to describe in my first post

RRs one cluster  per country and ibgp between RRs clusters

however your question was i think about to have PEs to peer with two differnt RRs clusters which you can do it if you want it like this as per the links i provided it above

HTH

[SaeedBakh_2]

Hi all,

the point here there is one AS number for the whole devices here ,so all the PoP in each country in the same AS number.

Also for example Egypt PE , what i undersood that it will be client route reflector and can not peer with  RR's in different cluster and if it possible is it required to peer with all RR's in each cluster or one RR from each cluser , this is just to try to reduce the IBGP in the PE.

[Marwan ALshawi]

Hi Ahmed

as per the links i provided there is no technical issue with peering ibgp with two RRs each with diffrent cluster id

the cluster ID used by RRs for routing looping prevention to check the reflected route if it has the same local cluster id then it wont install it

about the AS design and ibgp session

as per Mohmaed advise above you can have each country PE to peer with local country RRs ( two ibgp session )

and each of the RRs they have ibgp session with another country/cluster RRs for redundancy ) this means one more ibgp session per RR

also you might think about having BGP confederation to reduce the BGP peeing sessions but this will required a re design to the entire network

HTH

please rate the helpful posts

[shivjain]

why donot you plan for hierarchical design. Hierarchical RR design will help you in case of disaster from one country to another.

By using H-RR design, you even donot need to use the cluster because by default every router act as different cluster.

regards

Shivlu Jain

[chintan-shah]

If RR is goign to be used purely for VPN services and not Internet, You may wan to consider centralized approach having dedicated RR out of forwrading path. You can have one RR in each of Country ( or may be total twoRR - each in Tier 1 country) and let PE do with iBGP with minimum two RR.

I am not against using P as RR but in case you want consider with avilable some Cisco NPEG2.

Regards,

Chintan

[SaeedBakh_2]

That is good , can you explain more

Sent from my iPhone

On Aug 10, 2011, at 1:43 PM, shivjain

[shivjain]

hi

please check the below link which is having one H-RR design paper, hope that will help you.

http://www.mplsvpn.info/2008/11/hierarchical-route-reflector-design.html

regards

Shivlu Jain

[Marwan ALshawi]

i think the H-RR very reasonable and redundant however in this case a redesign to the core network and BGP sessions is required if this is not possible

what you could do is to have each country to use another country as failover

for example PE of country1 has BGP session and client of PRR of country1 the second link/BGP session is to be established with coutnry2 PRR

by the way you might consider removing the daisy chained links/BGP from PEs to Ps such as the one in Lebanon case as in this case if one link down you will be using the inter PE link which is not best way to do it

HTH

if helpful Rate

[SaeedBakh_2]

please can you explain why it is not the best way to have PE using the interlink between PE in a POP when the other PE connected to different country.