Ah, now I finally understand what you're saying. Yes, it is indeed true that, for some very odd reason, you must have some kind of TED enabled in order for TE to work in IOS. However, what you can do is create explicit paths that ignore the TED. But it is indeed the case that if you have no TED, the TE tunnels will drop, even if those tunnels do not use the TED.
""LU"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > This does not work for me, that's why I posted to make sure. If I do not > enable TE extension of IGPs, the tunnel refuses to come up, if I disabled > TE-extension at the egress, the tunnel will go down. The response from > others so far pretty much confirmed this. I do not have my configs now, but > if you need I can send them when I get back to office, just to make I did > not miss config anything. > > I assume you tested this yourself and made it work, if so, could you please > share your configuration so we all, at least myself, can benefit. > > Thanks > LU > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Well then the answer to your question is still yes, you can do it. I see > > that somebody on the Juniper list answered it, but I will answer it here > > too. You can set up explicit paths in your TE tunnels (tunnel mpls > > traffic-engineering path-option 1 explicit ...), and then set up a > > explicit-path. By doing so, you are creating the TE tunnels manually, so > > you do not need a TED, therefore you do not need OSPF or ISIS (or any > > routing protocol, for that matter) > > > > > > > > ""LU"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > hmm, okay here is what I was talking about, you can not set up a LSP in > > IOS > > > without enabling opaque or ISIS extensions. I did not make myself clear > > > that I was talking about TE, so LDP should not be in the picture, as you > > can > > > not reserve bandwidth with it, not till we have CR-LDP. Junos allows you > > > using no-cspf to ignore the TE-database and set up LSP just based on > > normal > > > IGP topology. > > > I just want to make sure that I did not miss some IOS commands here. > > > > > > Thanks > > > LU > > > > > > Another question about IOS LSP, what command do I use to advertise the > LSP > > > tunnel > > > ""nrf"" wrote in message > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > Uh, what are you talking about? Your question seems to be garbled. > > First > > > > of all, there are several ways to establish LSP's in IOS. If you want > > to > > > > set up LSP's using normal IGP, then just use LDP/TDP. JunOS also > allows > > > you > > > > to use LDP, or you can create LSP's manually (something that IOS > cannot > > > do). > > > > > > > > If you want to use MPLS-TE on IOS and you don't want to use opaque > > LSA's, > > > > then how about using ISIS extensions? > > > > > > > > > > > > ""LU"" wrote in message > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > > I just noticed that in cisco you can not establish LSP without > > enabling > > > > OSPF > > > > > opaque LSA, this is quite different from Juniper. JUNOS allows you > to > > > set > > > > up > > > > > LSP just based on normal IGP information. Am I missing some commands > > in > > > > IOS? > > > > > Does IOS have a way to enable MPLS-TE without having OSPF opaque > LSA? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > LU Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=41390&t=41268 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
