Thanks a lot Nick for your comments My customer is heavily deploying VPLS with autodiscovery , if I want to suggest replacement what will be the best options?
Most of the PEs are ASR903 and ASR920 with few ASR9K BR, Mohammad ________________________________ From: Nick Hilliard <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2016 2:33 PM To: Mohammad Khalil Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] VPLS Autodiscovery Redundant CE Mohammad Khalil wrote: > Hi Nick and thanks for the kind reply > > You mean something such as below (I tested it yesterday): > > l2vpn xconnect context MSSK > interworking ethernet > member 1.1.1.1 100 encapsulation mpls group GRP priority 9 > member 3.3.3.3 100 encapsulation mpls group GRP priority 10 > member GigabitEthernet3 service-instance 100 yes, something like that would be necessary. I haven't used vpls PE redundancy myself, so can't confirm whether this configuration will actually work correctly, but bgp autodiscovery will definitely not work. Also, you should think long and hard about whether vpls (with or without redundancy) is a feature that you want to use in production. It has a lot of failure modes which can lead to catastrophic network failure. Also, asciiflow.com is really useful for creating diagrams. Nick _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
