I should of specified rfc2547 vpns.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:02 AM, "Brad Hedlund (brhedlun)" <[email protected]
> wrote:
The term "VRF-Lite" comes from when Cisco started delivering VRF
capabilities across all Catalyst L3 platforms, even the low end.
Many vendors do support VRF on their high end routers and switches,
but few have comprehensive VRF support from the high end all the to
the low end.
MBGP is not required for L3 VPN's. That's the beauty of VRF-Lite end
to end. A customer can deploy a handfull of L3 VPN's within their
own campus without MPLS or BGP.
Sent from my iPhone
Brad Hedlund
On Jan 11, 2009, at 10:20 AM, "Brandon Bennett" <[email protected]>
wrote:
Vrf-lite is just a Cisco term for utilizing VRFs when no MPLS is
present. Any vendor who supports VRFs support "VRF-lite".
In all honesty it's a stupid term as VRF technology isn't tied to
MPLS at all. Yes vrf is required for l3 vpns but so is mBGP and
we don't have mBGP-lite :)
-Brandon
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 10, 2009, at 10:58 AM, Brad Hedlund <[email protected]>
wrote:
On 1/10/09 8:57 AM, "Chris Burwell" <[email protected]> wrote:
I am fairly certain the 8212zl can accomplish what was described
here,
the problem will be finding documentation on how to configure
everything.
Chris,
I would be curious to see what you come up with. The 8212 feature
list on
HP's website doesn't show anything similar to VRF-Lite. I'm
pretty sure
VRF-Lite like capabilities are unique to Cisco. Let me know if
you find
otherwise.
Cheers,
Brad Hedlund
[email protected]
http://www.internetworkexpert.org
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
