01-15-2013 06:49 AM
For MPLS netwrok, why it is necessary or recommended to have only "P" Routers on your main e.g: 10G link
Why it is not recommended to have "PE" routers connected as part of Metro Ring??
02-05-2013 01:04 PM
It's not necessary that your P be connected to 10G/main links. It's quite possible [and very much common] that none of your routers are purely P routers. All routers in the network could be PE and P at the same time, with each acting as P for certain LSPs and PE for others.
HTH.
02-06-2013 01:02 AM
ahan, but m scenario is ... we have 2 PE routes connected in the middle of 2 seperate P; and they are part of the ring
CE1 ---- PE3 ---- P1 ----- PE1 ---- PE2 ---- P2 ---- PE4 --- CE2
PE2 in this topology must be working P also; and should forward packets without checking whether PE2 own that routes of particular (RT) or not
But I have observed, for some vrf which PE2 doesn't have any connected routes, is discarding the routes
as work around I created dummy interface belonging this vrf so it can have atleast one connected route belong to that vrf
does that makes? is it possible or am i missing something
Thanks for help
02-06-2013 07:51 AM
I'm not getting 'Discarding the routes'? You do have PE3 and PE4 as iBGP neighbors...right?
Rais.
02-06-2013 09:04 AM
CE1 ---- PE3 ---- P1 ----- PE1 ---- PE2 ---- P2 ---- PE4 --- CE2
| |
P4 -------------PE5---------- P3
all these routers are part if same iBGP cloud, P1, P2, P3 and P4 are working as RR (ipv4 & vpnv4),
ospf is running between PE4 and CE2
and similarly ospf PE3 and CE1 ... under same vrf VPNA
mainly the traffic is flowing from CE1 to CE4 via .... PE5 path because of less isis-metric and PE5 also have connected routes of VPNA
when this link (of PE5) goes down; traffic starts flowing from P1 ----- PE1 ---- PE2 ---- P2 path
PE1 has connected routes of but PE2 doesnt have connected routes of VPN4
when traffic flows from P1 ----- PE1 ---- PE2 ---- P2 path; PE2 will check RT of VPN4 and will check that it doesnt have connected routes of VPN4, so it will not forward traffic to next hop
so when I configured one interface having connected routes of VPNA in PE2; traffic related to VPNA start flowing from CE1 to CE2 ... and where ever VPNA routes are required
This is actually my observation, this is merely my observation
This what I did as work around to solve the problme
02-07-2013 06:40 PM
Hello Muhammad,
If you want the PE router to accept the RTs which are not configured on it then you can enable command
no bgp default route-target filter
But I am a bit lost on how you have implemented your solution.
From what i understand, you are using All the P routers as RRs.
The PE routers have BGP sessions with the RRs only, while the RRs have full mesh.
Since PE2 is not reflecting the VPNV4 routes, there is no need to have the router configured with the vrf to accept the RTs.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide