cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
499
Views
0
Helpful
1
Replies

Maximum LSP on Inter-AS vpnv4/ipv4

fernando.romao
Level 1
Level 1

Hi Luc

Thank you for your reply, in fact we are in the process of using Option B (ASBR-to-ASBR). We have all the configs in place just did not activate the neighbors pending confirmation. We are using Eng5; I would expect CAM/TFIB to be able to hold these prefixes, I seem to have noticed that the weakest processor can handle up to one million. Yet, it is not written anywhere on these specifics.

Thanks

FR

1 Accepted Solution

Accepted Solutions

Luc De Ghein
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

Hi Fernando,

In MPLS VPN networks, 17000 vpnv4 prefixes is not that much. You can have hundreds of thousand of vpnv4 prefixes.

You did not specifiy which option A,B, C or D you are running. For option A and D, the scalability could become an issue because you'll have many logical links between the ASBRs, one for every VPN shared between the 2 autonomous systems. This is a known limitation factor in these two designs and it is a pain to operate such a model, starting from a certain scale. Each new VPN shared between the 2 autonomous systems will lead to the creation of a new logical link on the ASBRs.

Option B and C do not have this and are hence more scalable and easier to maintain operationally. What inter-as MPLS VPN brings is the concentration of the LSPs on the ASBRs, instead of having them spread over many PE and P routers in a non-inter-as MPLS VPN network. But, 17000 prefixes should be ok on a 12k router.

Thanks,

Luc

View solution in original post

1 Reply 1

Luc De Ghein
Cisco Employee
Cisco Employee

Hi Fernando,

In MPLS VPN networks, 17000 vpnv4 prefixes is not that much. You can have hundreds of thousand of vpnv4 prefixes.

You did not specifiy which option A,B, C or D you are running. For option A and D, the scalability could become an issue because you'll have many logical links between the ASBRs, one for every VPN shared between the 2 autonomous systems. This is a known limitation factor in these two designs and it is a pain to operate such a model, starting from a certain scale. Each new VPN shared between the 2 autonomous systems will lead to the creation of a new logical link on the ASBRs.

Option B and C do not have this and are hence more scalable and easier to maintain operationally. What inter-as MPLS VPN brings is the concentration of the LSPs on the ASBRs, instead of having them spread over many PE and P routers in a non-inter-as MPLS VPN network. But, 17000 prefixes should be ok on a 12k router.

Thanks,

Luc

Getting Started

Find answers to your questions by entering keywords or phrases in the Search bar above. New here? Use these resources to familiarize yourself with the community: