Dear Mattias
I will follow your recommendation. With MPLS things are a little bit confusing. Many thanks to all for your assistance. Regards Antonis On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Mattias Gyllenvarg < [email protected]> wrote: > Multihop BGP would give you the benefit of any redundancy you have along > the path. > > > On 10 April 2013 19:14, Antonis Vosdoganis <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We have a BGP session with a carrier delivered on ME3600-A. Because ME3600 >> is not able to carry bgp table we have create vlan 100 and we and made the >> gigabit port access to vlan 100. >> >> 7609 <---------- ME3600-B <--------- ME3600-A <------- BGP SESSION >> >> ME3600-A >> vlan 100 >> name BGP_PEERING >> >> interface GigabitEthernet0/1 >> description BGP_PEERING >> switchport access vlan 100 >> >> ME3600-A and ME3600-B are interconnected with a trunk port. >> >> ME3600-B >> vlan 100 >> name BGP_PEERING >> >> ME3600-B and 7609 are also interconnected with a trunk port >> >> CISCO 7609-S >> vlan 100 >> name BGP_PEERING >> >> interface Vlan100 >> description BGP_PEERING >> ip address XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX 255.255.255.248 >> >> In all trunk ports we are using mpls enabled SVIs. >> >> So the vlan 100 travels all the way from ME3600-A to 7609 and the bgp >> session is running on 7609. >> >> >> I am trying to say is it possible to replace the vlan with EoMPLS and how? >> >> Best Regards >> >> Antonis. >> _______________________________________________ >> cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp >> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ >> > > > > -- > *Med Vänliga Hälsningar - Best Regards* > > *Mattias Gyllenvarg* > *Nätutveckling* > Bredband2 > > Tel: +46 406219712 > > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
