cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
679
Views
5
Helpful
3
Replies
Patrick Colbeck
Participant

MPLS L3VPN and VPLS on the same PE

I was just wondering if there are any restriction on running MPLS L3 VPN and VPLS on the same PE ?

 

Use case would be a corporate network where the core is MPLS and they use L3VPNs to provide segmentation (basically the aggregation L2/L3 boundary is a PE). Now what of they also wanted to provide some multipoint connectivity for "customers" located in the same campus. Customers would be using their own WAN routers etc so this would be equivalent to just giving them some ports on a VLAN with no SVI if this was a flat network. Never tried it so I was curious.

Thanks

 

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
Giuseppe Larosa
Hall of Fame Master

Hello @Patrick Colbeck and @pigallo ,

 

generally speaking it is possible and I did it in the past but as already noted you provided very few details on your topology, platforms that we can only recap lessons learned on the field:

 

each PE node has a single space of label with the first usable label being label 16.

All the following protocols can allocate a label on a node but label xyz if in use cannot be re-used by another protocol.:

LDP : basic MPLS and EoMPLS pseudowire

MP BGP varius AFs the inner label is allocated and it is part of the MP NLRI in MP BGP Update messages

RSVP TE

RSVP TE p2mp

LDP mp2mp

VPLS can allocate blocks of labels to a given VPLS.

VPLS in Cisco implementation can be manual (manual setup of LDP pseudowire) or it can use MP BGP for discovery of interested PE nodes  , finally VPLS can use MP BGP both for discovery and for building the pseudowire (Juniper implementation).

At the data plane a given PE interface can be a member of a L3 VPN VRF EXOR an access link of a VPLS.

There are some strange tricks where different interfaces of a carrier class PE like ASR 9000 or in the past C7600 could be connected together to join a VPLS to a L3 VPN.

 

Hope to help

Giuseppe

 

View solution in original post

3 REPLIES 3
pigallo
Cisco Employee

 

Hello,

generally speaking, both features can coexist on same PE.
Unfortunately, restrictions always exist. Your question is very generic if it's put in these terms.
You should carefully consider and include many other variables to correctly trace service limitations/restrictions when you put these two complex technologies together.
Those variables do not cover only issues you may derive from combining a set of feature per se, but for example, from others factors, such as: platforms involved in the network, hardware equipment, modules, software releases, configuration flavors, underlying services dependencies, etc. etc.

 

I hope i clarified your concern.

 

 

Regards.

 

Giuseppe Larosa
Hall of Fame Master

Hello @Patrick Colbeck and @pigallo ,

 

generally speaking it is possible and I did it in the past but as already noted you provided very few details on your topology, platforms that we can only recap lessons learned on the field:

 

each PE node has a single space of label with the first usable label being label 16.

All the following protocols can allocate a label on a node but label xyz if in use cannot be re-used by another protocol.:

LDP : basic MPLS and EoMPLS pseudowire

MP BGP varius AFs the inner label is allocated and it is part of the MP NLRI in MP BGP Update messages

RSVP TE

RSVP TE p2mp

LDP mp2mp

VPLS can allocate blocks of labels to a given VPLS.

VPLS in Cisco implementation can be manual (manual setup of LDP pseudowire) or it can use MP BGP for discovery of interested PE nodes  , finally VPLS can use MP BGP both for discovery and for building the pseudowire (Juniper implementation).

At the data plane a given PE interface can be a member of a L3 VPN VRF EXOR an access link of a VPLS.

There are some strange tricks where different interfaces of a carrier class PE like ASR 9000 or in the past C7600 could be connected together to join a VPLS to a L3 VPN.

 

Hope to help

Giuseppe

 

Thanks all

 

We are going to run the details past Cisco via our SE to make sure we don't run into any platform restrictions.

I just wanted to confirm that theoretically it could be done first. I thought so but its years since I did much MPLS.