Right, In JUNOS LDP Downstream On Demand mode realized Downstream Unsolicited - IOS It explains such behavior Sometimes I'm implementin in IOS "on demand" in the follow manner: ! tag-switching advertise-tags for ldp-binding-filter ! ! ip access-list standard ldp-binding-filter remark -- anounce labels only for Loopback address space -- permit 10.255.0.0 0.0.255.255 ! ____________________________________________
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric Van Tol Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 5:42 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [j-nsp] JUNOS MPLS vs. IOS MPLS All, I am venturing into the fray of JUNOS/IOS MPLS interop and have some questions. It's my understanding that with JUNOS, LDP will only advertise loopback routes into the inet.3 table, unless otherwise configured. IOS appears to announce every known route via LDP by default. What are best practices for handling route advertisements through LDP in a multivendor environment? Would one implement restrictive filtering on the Cisco or rather configure less restrictive filtering on the Juniper? While I imagine this depends on one's own design goals, maybe someone can comment on which one, to them, seems to add less complexity. Also, what other types of pitfalls would one expect when trying to implement MPLS and TE in a mixed Juniper/Cisco environment? Links would definitely also help get me on the right track. TIA, evt _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
