> Of Krzysztof Szarkowicz > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 8:51 PM > To: James Bensley > Cc: Juniper List > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] Longest Match for LDP (RFC5283) > > > > On 2018-Jul-30, at 17:13, James Bensley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On 30 July 2018 at 15:22, Krzysztof Szarkowicz <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> James, > >> > >> As mentioned in my earlier mail, you can use it even with DU. If ABR > >> has > >> 10000 /32 LDP FECs, you can configure LDP export policy on ABR to > >> send only subset (e. g. 20 /32 FECs) to access. > >> > >> Saying that, typical deployment is with DoD, since typically access > >> PEs (and not ABRs) have better knowledge which loop backs are needed. > >> So, basically access PEs send the info to ABR, which loop backs are > >> needed, and which loop backs are not needed via LDP DoD machinery. > > > > Hi Kryzstof, > > > > This was exactly my point: > > I have seen a deployment, where services were deployed via some > centralized provisioning system. Part of the service provisioning was to > adjust > the LDP export policy on ABR, since LDP DU was used (some access PEs didn’t > supported LDP DoD in that deployment). So, if you have some devices > without LDP DoD support, your only choice is LDP DU + policies :-). > Or BGP-LU + policies,
One follow up question, What about the case, where the minimum set of /32 loopback routes and associated labels is simply beyond the capabilities of an access node. Is there a possibility for such access node to rely on default route + label -where originator of such a labelled default-route is the local ABR(s) in "opt-B" role doing full IP lookup and then repackaging packets towards the actual NH please? adam netconsultings.com ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry:: _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
