> > > Yeah the terms PIC edge and core are really confusing and I'll try to > avoid those. > But what I meant by PIC edge was essentially PE-CE link protection and by > PIC core I meant PE-CE node protection. > They both rely on BGP PIC. > And by PIC I mean the FIB hierarchy (where indirect next hop is used > between the prefix and the actual forwarding next hop (borrowing juniper > terms here) ) > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_bgp/configuration/xe-3s/irg-xe-3s-book/irg-bgp-mp-pic.html#GUID-8D2DAC32-EDDC-4657-B331-0163742D53CF > > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/iproute_bgp/configuration/xe-3s/irg-xe-3s-book/irg-bgp-mp-pic.html#GUID-473F4D7C-0242-42E6-94CE-938A9D248F7A > *should be: "Thus, with BGP PIC enabled on "PE1", Cisco Express Forwarding > detects..." > > The terms are confusing I agree. The first doc I ever read on it was:
https://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog40/presentations/ClarenceFilsfils-BGP.pdf ...so I tend to stick to these terms/explanations, but the doc is quite old and no doubt vendors now use the different terms interchangeably. There is no mention of PE-CE link protection here but for me that's just another failure scenario that PIC edge deals with (BGP withdraw as the trigger rather than BGP next-hop change/IGP trigger). Cheers, Dan _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
