No idea on the interoperability but technology wise I'd rule out Draft-Rosen if you can.
It's often forgotten for recent Cisco stuff or implemented as an afterthought (the ASR903 RSP-2/ASR920 being a perfect example of this, no Draft-Rosen support as of now, RSP-1 Draft-Rosen for the 903 also took a fair amount of time to stabilise and sometimes was broken in patch releases), it doesn't always play nicely (we've had many issues with it on the 7600, including duplicate streams) and it's the most architecturally unsound service of the MVPN solution out there, in terms of traffic distribution, efficiency and redundancy. Kind regards, Sibbi On 16/11/15 09:00, "cisco-nsp on behalf of Alex K." <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote: >Hello everyone, > >I'm having a little bit of problem, trying to figure out which multicast >VPN solution will interoperate on both vendors. > >It's seems quite certain to me, that both vendors are implementing >draft-rosen (aka dual PIM), but to my knowledge, there're more advanced >solutions nowadays - namely, M-LSP & RSVP-TE > >(both for setting up P2MP LSPs used for multicast actual forwarding, *not* >in the TE sense of word). > >Anyhow, there's no clear explanation on each side, which draft a >*particular CLI* is referencing to (i.e. implementing). > >Any recommendations regarding working, interoperable mVPN solution, will be >gladly appreciated! > >Thank you. >_______________________________________________ >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/
