Q/Pshem/Aftab, et al, 

I think what I'm asking is that I want to ensure that I can do something that I 
guess would be termed PE-CGN... borrowing and combining the terms CGN (ios xr 
term I guess) and PE NAT (vrf aware, ios term I guess).  PE-CGN I guess meaning 
CGN integration with MPLS L3VPN

So basically, I would want my asr9k mpls pe which is sitting on my internet 
boundary (mpls side is inside towards *my* mpls cloud) to house the vsm cgn 
module and do nat there.  So I think I would be disposing of labels hopefully 
before the nat inside of vsm, and in the reverse direction, imposing labels 
after the nat inside of the vsm

Aaron


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Aaron
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 9:28 PM
To: 'Pshem Kowalczyk'; [email protected]; 'Aftab Siddiqui'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR9006 - CG NAT - VSM-500

Thanks Pshem and Aftab, I will be glad to share my findings later with you all 
and the community.

 

Aftab, I looked over your notes and I see you show 3 examples… 

1 – vrf inside and default/core vrf outside

2 – vrf inside and vrf outside

3 – ABF (acl based forwarding)

 

But please tell me how you think my scenario would be config’d.  My scenario is 
mpls default/core vrf inside, and vrf outside.  I’m guessing that it’s the 
opposite of your example #1, but just wanted to ask you what you think.

 

Aaron

 

 

From: Pshem Kowalczyk [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 7:58 PM
To: Aaron; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ASR9006 - CG NAT - VSM-500

 

Hi,

 

We use the previous non-virtualised cards (ISM-100) in our 9Ks. The experience 
has been generally positive. The configuration is quite simple and the cards 
work well.

Do spend some time analysing various limitations of the card (pool sizes, 
throughput per ServiceApp pair, allowed bulk allocation sizes (if you plan on 
bulk allocation)).

 

I'm interested in knowing the results of your tests, as we're told by the BU 
that if we want more throughput we'll have to go to VSM anyway.

 

kind regards

Pshem

 

 

On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 at 06:24 Aaron <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Group,



I'm going to test Nat on my ASR9006 in my lab using the RSP440-TR and the 
VSM-500.



Looking for any links to information or experience you all might have on how to 
get going on this.



I'm looking for this to be implemented at my internet boundary ASR9k so I will 
test it like that in the lab.



My asr9k at my internet boundary is the PE Edge of my mpls l3vpn's internal to 
my network, so the nat would need to work like that.  The asr9k internet 
connection is PE-CE bgp, native ip connection put into my internet vrf for my 
internal customer vrf.  Same vrf.



Aaron



_______________________________________________
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/

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Reply via email to