Yes I thought the FIB filter is a given on a RR,
But didn’t know about the “no-install” knob so using: “set routing-options forwarding-table export <policy-name>” –where the policy is just ”from protocol bgp; then reject” -so I guess then it’s the FIB filter –that does the trick and allows us to use just the simple: “resolution rib bgp.rtarget.0 resolution-ribs inet.0” -well now just need to recall to search nsp archives when I need this couple years later :) adam netconsultings.com ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry:: From: Misak Khachatryan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 1:16 PM To: [email protected] Cc: Ivan Ivanov; [email protected] Subject: Re: [j-nsp] vRR/L3VPN/Unusable And we played a bit with colleagues and found third way, for me it seems the best - use no-install for protocol families, which effectively disables installing routes to forwarding table and somehow disables nexthop validation. My config is now like this: > show configuration protocols bgp mtu-discovery; family inet-vpn { unicast { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 3; } } family inet6-vpn { unicast { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 3; } } family l2vpn { auto-discovery-only { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 10; } signaling { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 10; } } family evpn { signaling { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 10; } } family inet-mvpn { signaling { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 10; } } family inet6-mvpn { signaling { no-install; output-queue-priority priority 9; } } family route-target { advertise-default; output-queue-priority priority 12; } > show configuration routing-options resolution { rib bgp.rtarget.0 { resolution-ribs inet.0; } } The only family that still needs resolution is route-target. Best regards, Misak Khachatryan, On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:08 PM [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > wrote: > From: Ivan Ivanov [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> ] > Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2018 10:58 AM > > Hi, > > There are a few different ways to resolve the MP-BGP routes on out of band > Juniper RR. Depends on how flexible you want to be, one can use static route > in inet.3, change of the resolution or rib-groups copying the routes form > inet.0 to inet.3. > > Using the static route will work even without family mpls enabled on the > interfaces. However the other two ways require that family to be enabled on > the RR interfaces. > Hmm that’s interesting, cause on code version 12 and 15 the “set routing-options resolution rib bgp.l3vpn.0 resolution-ribs inet.0” is the only thing that’s needed, i.e. no need for family mpls on RR interfaces. So I have a theory that once you enable inet.3 (in any shape or form) then you need "family mpls" on RR interfaces? adam netconsultings.com <http://netconsultings.com> ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry:: _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
