09-24-2009 07:45 PM
Extract from MPLS VPN Architecture chapter 9....
"Contrary to the traditional BGP operation in which the internal BGP routes are not allowed to be redistributed into other routing protocols, this restriction is lifted in the MPLS/VPN environment. The VPN routes received by a PE router through an internal MP-BGP session from another PE router can be redistributed into other routing protocols."
Is it true .... kindly comment ???
09-24-2009 08:43 PM
This is true because some customers will chose to run such IGPs as RIPv2 as the PE-CE protocol on some sites (like small branch offices) and run BGP at their HQ. So within the SP network, there will be redistribution of routes advertised from the HQ (using BGP) into the SP core which will then need to be redistributed into the RIPv2 vpnv4 vrf address-family to the Brach CE, for the Branch CE to learn these networks their HQ wants them to know. This is just an example to explain to you better.
09-24-2009 09:43 PM
my question was about the following statement:
"Contrary to the traditional BGP operation in which the internal BGP routes are not allowed to be redistributed into other routing protocols"
09-24-2009 10:17 PM
Hello Mukarram,
this simply means that for MP BGP routes in af vpnv4 you don't need to explicitly allow redistribution of iBGP learned routes into an IGP.
see
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/iproute/command/reference/irp_bgp1.html#wp1014183
that is
bgp redistribute-internal
this is not needed in address-family vrf X to have iBGP learned routes redistributed into a PE-CE routing protocol.
this command is still needed in global routing table if you want to redistribute iBGP learned routes into an IGP.
Hope to help
Giuseppe
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