Fw: new message
Hey! New message, please read <http://battersandco.com/moved.php?ut4> devang patel
Fw: new message
Hey! New message, please read <http://ankitstudygroup.com/finding.php?3> devang patel
Re: Multicast LDP or P2MP RSVP LDP
Brendan, Thanks for your reply and link. Do you have any good white paper or scenario based example to share? Thanks, Devang On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 7:45 PM, Brendan Kelly bke...@juniper.net wrote: Devang here is our guide. http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.0/information-products/topic-collections/config-guide-vpns/vpns-configuring-point-to-multipoint-lsps-for-multicast-vpns.html#jd0e38149 Thanks Brendan On Nov 26, 2009, at 12:53 AM, devang patel wrote: Rob, Can you share some documentation with me on how to configure as well as any kind of configuration example will be great help. Thanks, Devang On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Rob Shakir r...@eng.gxn.net wrote: On 26 Nov 2009, at 06:27, devang patel wrote: Hi All, I just want to know about the deployment of Multicast LDP or P2MP RSVP and LDP is available from any vendor or they are still in draft status? Hi Devang, To the best of my knowledge, the only current P2MP LSP implementation available is in JunOS [0]. The guys at Juniper wrote a draft relating to their experience with scaling and implementing P2MP MVPN [1], which is worth a look -- this draft mentions that IOS XR has an implementation, although I struggled to find any documentation that confirms this. Both the LDP-based [2] P2MP standard are still in draft status, but the extensions required in RSVP-TE for signalling P2MP paths are in RFC4875 [3]. From a couple of discussions I've had, there are not very many people using this functionality -- with most common application being IPTV. For traditional transport of multicast over an SP core, it's often easier to provide some AToM/L2VPN service. Hope this helps somewhat. Kind regards, Rob [0]: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos91/feature-guide/configuring-traffic-engineering-p2mp-lsps-in-provider-tunnels.html [1]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-joseph-p2mp-mvpn-experience-00 [2]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-08 [3]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4875 -- Rob Shakir r...@eng.gxn.net Network Development EngineerGX Networks/Vialtus Solutions ddi: +44208 587 6077mob: +44797 155 4098 pgp: 0xc07e6deb nic-hdl: RJS-RIPE This email is subject to: http://www.vialtus.com/disclaimer.html
Multicast LDP or P2MP RSVP LDP
Hi All, I just want to know about the deployment of Multicast LDP or P2MP RSVP and LDP is available from any vendor or they are still in draft status? Also it will be great if some one can give me an idea of Multicast VPN deployment in service providers; are they deployed with draft Rosen GRE based solution or BGP auto discovery mechanism? Thanks in advance for help... regards, Devang
Re: Multicast LDP or P2MP RSVP LDP
Rob, Can you share some documentation with me on how to configure as well as any kind of configuration example will be great help. Thanks, Devang On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 12:46 AM, Rob Shakir r...@eng.gxn.net wrote: On 26 Nov 2009, at 06:27, devang patel wrote: Hi All, I just want to know about the deployment of Multicast LDP or P2MP RSVP and LDP is available from any vendor or they are still in draft status? Hi Devang, To the best of my knowledge, the only current P2MP LSP implementation available is in JunOS [0]. The guys at Juniper wrote a draft relating to their experience with scaling and implementing P2MP MVPN [1], which is worth a look -- this draft mentions that IOS XR has an implementation, although I struggled to find any documentation that confirms this. Both the LDP-based [2] P2MP standard are still in draft status, but the extensions required in RSVP-TE for signalling P2MP paths are in RFC4875 [3]. From a couple of discussions I've had, there are not very many people using this functionality -- with most common application being IPTV. For traditional transport of multicast over an SP core, it's often easier to provide some AToM/L2VPN service. Hope this helps somewhat. Kind regards, Rob [0]: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/software/junos/junos91/feature-guide/configuring-traffic-engineering-p2mp-lsps-in-provider-tunnels.html [1]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-joseph-p2mp-mvpn-experience-00 [2]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-08 [3]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4875 -- Rob Shakir r...@eng.gxn.net Network Development EngineerGX Networks/Vialtus Solutions ddi: +44208 587 6077mob: +44797 155 4098 pgp: 0xc07e6deb nic-hdl: RJS-RIPE This email is subject to: http://www.vialtus.com/disclaimer.html
Re: bgp best path compare-routerid implementation example
Hi... So according to command it will select the path received from lowest router id right... so if you are sure about the path selection pattern then its good idea to use it... And true that path selection change based on own network design... is it good idea to set all received route attribute to particular origin code i as Dani showed in presentation... well again I guess answer will be depends on network design... Thanks, Dev On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Austin Wilson aust...@bandcon.com wrote: Dev, This is usually used to offset the oldest route metric. The problem is that when a link fails and comes back online, traffic can shift from one provider to another in the middle of your billing cycle. This then could mean you get double billed for that traffic. People use the command to basically turn off the oldest route metric and use the routerid (not peering ip) to make the last decision on where to send your traffic. This is commonly called tie breaker traffic. If a peer fails with this command enabled, when the peer comes back online, traffic should be restored to the original level before the failure. A possible issue with this command is that if a local peer's route/session flaps it could have more of an effect on your network/router as it will always try move those routes back to the FIB. That's probably why they implemented this metric in the first place, the oldest route is the most stable. Another issue is that you are at the mercy of vendor's routerid when your router decides where to send your tie breaker traffic. Level3 gets most of this traffic since they have such low routeids. There are ways to get around this problem and take back control of your tie breaker traffic. Dani did a pretty good tutorial on this issue and its located here: http://nanog.org/meetings/nanog46/abstracts.php?pt=MTM3MiZuYW5vZzQ2nm=nanog46 Basically he suggests using MEDs to change the tie breaker as part of a complete BGP traffic engineering solution. Doing the things listed there and elsewhere will mean you won't even have to use this command. Austin Wilson -Original Message- From: devang patel [mailto:devan...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:24 PM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: bgp best path compare-routerid implementation example Hello Nanog, I am looking for the *bgp best path compare*-*routerid* implementation example? I know the function of it but looking for some scenario where its been used... Thanks, Dev
bgp best path compare-routerid implementation example
Hello Nanog, I am looking for the *bgp best path compare*-*routerid* implementation example? I know the function of it but looking for some scenario where its been used... Thanks, Dev
MPLS Multi-vrf and IP Multicast
Hello All, Any scenario where we are using MPLS between PE-CE when CE is multi-vrf router, any deployment in real word? Carrier supporting carrier CSC is one where you have MPLS between PE-CE link. If PE-CE running MPLS between them then what will be impact on MULTICAST between two site? If PE-CE connectivity is pure IP then i think multicast will work properly right? thanks, Devang Patel
BGP Confederation over Route Reflector
Hello, What are the advantages of BGP Confederation over Route Reflector? I mean when one should decide to deploy BGP Confederation over Route Reflector deployment? Thanks, Devang Patel
Link capacity upgrade threshold
Hi All, I just wanted to know what is Link capacity upgrade threshold in terms of % of link utilization? Just to get an idea... thanks, Devang Patel
Template for PE router configuration
Hello, Is there any good document about PE router configuration template or any sample configuration some one can share, if possible? I am looking for the PE configuration template which has multiple MPLS VPN customer as well as PPPoE aggregation on it. regards Devang Patel
Sprint latency
Hello, Any one is facing any latency in network passing trough sprint network, we have remote site and having trouble with accessing application from data centers. 7 200.122.150.22 0 msec 0 msec 4 msec *8 144.224.115.113 260 msec 276 msec 284 msec* * 9 144.232.2.244 276 msec 280 msec 292 msec* *10 144.232.2.204 292 msec 304 msec 300 msec* 11 144.223.162.42 120 msec 120 msec 120 msec thanks, Devang Patel
Internet access using VRF aware NAT
Hello, Have one question about VRF aware NAT for internet access! If we will enable the VRF aware NAT on local PE to have an internet access via central Internet PE then we will not have connectivity to any other VPN site as all local CE prefixes will be translated to the loopback IP address of the local PE. We can have route map which will match the ACL for specific CE source to specific VPN destination with deny key word and it will prevent the NAT when CE will try to communicate with other CE of same VPN or different VPN. That looks longer configuration in real world right! so is that the only way I have when I will have only one option to configure the locap PE with VRF aware NAT to gain internet access? I need to know what is the implement in real world? How service provider networks are providing internet access with MPLS VPN option? I know about customer is getting VPN connectivity on one router and service provider will give other internet connectivity link which might be terminating on same router or other router. I just want to know which is mostly used option as far as the internet access service with MPLS VPN services! thanks, Devang Patel
Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Thanks all for sharing information! regards Devang Patel On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 11:43 AM, Justin Shore jus...@justinshore.comwrote: Kevin Oberman wrote: I would hope you have a backbone well enough secured that you don't need to rely on this, but it does make me a bit more relaxed and makes me wish we were using ISIS for IPv4, as well. The time and disruption involved in converting is something that will keep us running OSPF for IPv4 for a long time, though. I remember the 'fun' of converting from IGRP to OSPF about 13 years ago and I'd prefer to retire before a repeat. I did the OSPF -- IS-IS migration some time back and here's some of the info I found at the time. http://www.nanog.org/meetings/nanog29/abstracts.php?pt=Njg2Jm5hbm9nMjk=nm=nanog29 Vijay did a nice presentation on AOL's migration to IS-IS. IIRC AOL migrated everything in 2 days. Day 1 was to migrate their test POP and hone their script. All remaining POPs were migrated on Day 2. I believe he said it went well. There have been several other documented migrations too: http://www.geant.net/upload/pdf/GEANT-OSPF-to-ISIS-Migration.pdf http://www.ripe.net/ripe/meetings/ripe-47/presentations/ripe47-eof-ospf.pdf I migrated my SP from a flat OSPF network (end to end area 0) to IS-IS. The OSPF setup was seriously screwed up. Someone got the bright idea to changes admin distances on some OSPF speakers, introduce a default in some places with static defaults in others, redistributing like it was going out of style, redisting a static for a large customer subnet on P2 instead of P1 which is what PE1 actually connected to (and not advertising the route from PE1 for some unknown reason), etc. The old setup was a nightmare. The IS-IS migration went fairly well after I got some major bugs worked out on our 7600s. I implemented IS-IS overtop of OSPF. Some OSPF speakers had admin distances of 80 and some were default. IS-IS slipped in over top with no problems. I raised IS-IS to 254 for the initial phase anyway just to be safe. Once I had IS-IS up I verified it learned all the expected routes via IS-IS. Then I lowered its admin distance back to the default and bumped OSPF up to 254. Shortly thereafter I nuked OSPF from each device. It was hitless. I never could get IS-IS to work with multiple areas. The 7600s made a smelly mess on the CO floor every time I tried. In the end I went with a L2-only IS-IS network. Still it works well for the most part. I've had about as much trouble with IS-IS as I have had with OSPF. Occasionally some random router will get a burr under it's saddle and jack up the MTU on the CLNS packets beyond the interface's max. The receiving router will drop the padded frame as too big. Fixing this can sometimes happen with a shut/no shut. Sometimes I can nuke the entire IS-IS config and re-add the config. Other times I simply have to reboot. This doesn't happen too often; it's usually several hours after I rock the IS-IS boat so to speak. Still, I wouldn't go back to OSPF for this SP. Justin
Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Hi, Thanks all of you to provide your inputs on my questions! The main idea behind Multitopology in IS-IS is to enabling the IPv6 routing in the redundant part of the network so that way I will not mess around with the current IPv4 routing or services which is running or serving to customers currently! so by migrating redundant part of the topology to IPv6 using Multitopology IS-IS and make it that part as a active for IPv6 for testing how it works! and then I can enable the IPv6 on my whole network! I guess that might be the good benefit. Same thing we can do with OSPFv3 also as I can enable IPv6 routing using OSPFv3 on my redundant part of the network and after successful migration i can enable it on my whole network! But again as far as expansion is concern IS-IS is good protocol to consider. OSPF does have bit more complexity in terms of operation. again the one question is how about the router resource utilization for both the protocol if I will be running IPv6 and IPv4 in the network! One more question: do we need to enable the IPv6 on each and every router of the service provider network including P routers also? does it really required to run IPv6 on each and every router? or running it on only PE router is sufficient to support the customers needs? regards Devang Patel On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 10:29 AM, deles...@gmail.com wrote: Having worked for seveal SP's 'tier 1' and otherwise along with a couple of router vendors IMO MT is one of those thing people ask for just in case. Sure we _could_ always find a use for it, but we don't always look at the potential diffrent IGP topologies are going to cause for our NOC staff @ 2am over a holiday weekend when some does decide to break. -jim --Original Message-- From: Randy Bush To: Mark Tinka Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3 Sent: Dec 27, 2008 9:27 AM For IS-IS, highly recommend MT to avoid any nasties while turning up v6 in a dual-stack environment. as one who has been burned when topologies are not congruent, i gotta ask. if i do not anticipate v4 and v6 having different topologies, and all my devices are dual-capable, would you still recommend mt for other than future-proofing? randy Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Hello, I do have some confusion about which one is better for IPv6 in Service Provider networks as far as IP routing and MPLS application is concern! 1. Which protocol should i use to support the IPv6 in network: ISIS or OSPFv3? As ISIS has multi-topology feature that can give us capability to run IPv4 network separate from IPv6 right! and same thing with OSPF: OSPFv2 will be used for IPv4 routing and OSPFv3 will be used for IPv6 routing! again Its look like resourceutilization for both the protocol will be same as they are going to use separate database for storing the routing or topology information. ISIS still has advantage over OSPF as it does use the TLV structure which can help in expanding network to support the new feature! 2. MPLS is not distributing label for IPv6 protocol so again there will not be any IGP best path calcuated for any MPLS related application for IPv6! 3. what if i have already running OSPFv2 for IPv4 in the network then should i think for migrating to ISIS? if yes then what are the advantages that I can look at for migrating my network to IS-IS? regards Devang Patel
Re: IPv6: IS-IS or OSPFv3
Kevin, Thanks for pointing out other good part of having CLNS as a transport for ISIS as a security point! regards Devang Patel On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 9:37 PM, Kevin Oberman ober...@es.net wrote: Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 19:47:21 -0700 From: devang patel devan...@gmail.com Hello, I do have some confusion about which one is better for IPv6 in Service Provider networks as far as IP routing and MPLS application is concern! 1. Which protocol should i use to support the IPv6 in network: ISIS or OSPFv3? As ISIS has multi-topology feature that can give us capability to run IPv4 network separate from IPv6 right! and same thing with OSPF: OSPFv2 will be used for IPv4 routing and OSPFv3 will be used for IPv6 routing! again Its look like resourceutilization for both the protocol will be same as they are going to use separate database for storing the routing or topology information. ISIS still has advantage over OSPF as it does use the TLV structure which can help in expanding network to support the new feature! 2. MPLS is not distributing label for IPv6 protocol so again there will not be any IGP best path calcuated for any MPLS related application for IPv6! 3. what if i have already running OSPFv2 for IPv4 in the network then should i think for migrating to ISIS? if yes then what are the advantages that I can look at for migrating my network to IS-IS? FWIW, we run OSPF for IPv4 and ISIS for IPv6. We started with ISIS for v6 because we were routing IPv6 before OSPFv3 was available. The main reason I prefer ISIS is that it uses CLNS packets for communications and we don't route CLNS. (I don't think ANYONE is routing CLNS today.) That makes it pretty secure. I would hope you have a backbone well enough secured that you don't need to rely on this, but it does make me a bit more relaxed and makes me wish we were using ISIS for IPv4, as well. The time and disruption involved in converting is something that will keep us running OSPF for IPv4 for a long time, though. I remember the 'fun' of converting from IGRP to OSPF about 13 years ago and I'd prefer to retire before a repeat. The real issue is that you need to run something you understand and can manage effectively. It that is OSPF, it will certainly do the job. If it is ISIS, it will, too. The real differences are few and not significant for most. -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) Ernest O. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) E-mail: ober...@es.net Phone: +1 510 486-8634 Key fingerprint:059B 2DDF 031C 9BA3 14A4 EADA 927D EBB3 987B 3751
OSPF with Multiple ABR ASBR
Hi All, I am not sure is this the good place to ask this question or not!!! I am looking for feed back on having OSPF multi-area, lets say if you have multiple location in nonbackbone areas and those nonbackbone areas are connected with the one backbone area. For example: OSPF AREA1 has the connectivity to OSPF AREA0 using two ABR, so what is the optimum way to achieve the load balancing or load sharing for traffic entering or leaving the area, what are the possible way to configure it? regards Devang Patel
Re: Router Choice
I guess they have good lab in Plano, TX also!!!I worked on the same routers for IPTV deployment and really they are best!!! regards Devang Patel On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Dan Snyder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that the 7750SR routers are great and you won't be let down. We used to have an all Cisco network and I was skeptical at first but they have been great. As for nss and nsr when we tested this by failing a cpm we saw less than 50 ms of traffic loss. I would see if you could go to either California or Canada to one of ALUs labs and have it demonstrated for you. hth, Dan Sent from my iPhone On Nov 12, 2008, at 7:40 AM, Raymond Macharia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello fellow nanogers, I am a long time user of Cisco gear and currently evaluating an alternative for my network expansion. currently the one that looks like it will be able to do the job iare Alcatel-Lucent 7710/7750 service routers. I am looking for real life experience of those who have used it and what I may need to watch out for (if anything) I have seen in some of their documentation features like Non-stop Services (NSS) and Non-stop Routing (NSR). are these features real world deployable. oh, just to add I want to use the routers as P routers in my IP/MPLS core Regards -- Raymond Macharia
MPLS for IPv6
Hi, Does any vendor support the MPLS for native IPv6 network? I was working on one testing scenario where I have Cisco 7200 routers and whole network is running only IPv6 and I wanted to run MPLS on the top of that but I found MPLS is not supported on IPv6 networks? is that true? regards Devang Patel
Re: MPLS for IPv6
Hi, Its lab environment, just created one topology having few routers and testing it for MPLS VPN for IPv6!!! the thing is enabling MPLS on interface having IPv6 address will not bring up LDP neighbor relationship, and due to that it will not assign the MPLS label to the prefixes!!! so I just want to get information about the same!!! It was suprising me when I was going to the configuration and verification!!! regards Devang Patel On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:19 PM, Charles Wyble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: devang patel wrote: Hi, Does any vendor support the MPLS for native IPv6 network? I think the bigger question is what vendors support native IPv6 networks and at what stage of maturity. :) I was working on one testing scenario where I have Cisco 7200 routers and whole network is running only IPv6 and I wanted to run MPLS on the top of that but I found MPLS is not supported on IPv6 networks? is that true? What sort of environment was this in? A lab environment? Or over a vendors network? http://www.google.com/search?q=ipv6+mplsie=utf-8oe=utf-8aq=trls=org.mozilla:en-US:officialclient=firefox-amight be of interest. regards Devang Patel
Re: Same AS number from different location and Migration of IP addresses
Hi, So if I will have the globally unique IP addresses for both the site which are located at different location then its perfectly fine to use the same as number in for same organisation having two different site located at different location...right!!! regards Devang Patel On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 10:40 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sure it is. the magical anycast, used by many for DNS service delivery oes exactly this. --bill On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 07:15:52PM -0500, devang patel wrote: Hello, Is that okay to use Same AS number for the two different site on different location? regards Devang Patel
Re: Same AS number from different location and Migration of IP addresses
Hi, Yes I do have link between two sites so I will configure routing accordingly so communication between two sites will follow that link... regards Devang Patel On Sun, May 25, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Jay Hennigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: devang patel wrote: So if I will have the globally unique IP addresses for both the site which are located at different location then its perfectly fine to use the same as number in for same organisation having two different site located at different location...right!!! Right. But as others have stated you will have to do some configuration in order for the two locations to communicate *with each other*. There are a a few different ways to accomplish this as has been discussed previously. -- Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Impulse Internet Service - http://www.impulse.net/ Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
Same AS number from different location
Hello, Is that okay to use Same AS number for the two different site on different location? as well as any good documentation or link or deployment scenario where I can find the merging of two different AS into one AS? As well as what to do if I have an IP addresses as a service provider dependent block and want to migrate IP addressing to the IANA assigned ip addresses? how can i achieve that? regards Devang Patel
Same AS number from different location and Migration of IP addresses
Hello, Is that okay to use Same AS number for the two different site on different location? as well as any good documentation or link or deployment scenario where I can find the merging of two different AS into one AS? As well as what to do if I have an IP addresses as a service provider dependent block and want to migrate IP addressing to the IANA assigned ip addresses? how can i achieve that? regards Devang Patel
Re: [NANOG] Routing table for BGP
hello All, Yeah NANOG knowledge base is really great... thanks to all of you for your help... regards Devang Patel On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Christopher Morrow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Barry Raveendran Greene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The nice thing about NANOG is that we have YEARS of on-line Video training to help you get up to speed. 1. Go to http://www.nanog.org/subjects.html (Index of Talks) 2. Look for materials on BGP. 3. Have fun learning from the best. My suggestion would be to watch last NANOG's BGP Tutorial. The nice thing about this is that you can E-mail the speaker to get clarifications. TO NANOG Community - We should really be pointed these FAQs to the resources/tools we've invested in building. I don't know whose idea it was to VOD everything, but it is an vast untapped store house of knowledge. I think there is a nanog-wiki that Lynda was poking at last even?? Maybe making sure there's a searchable form thingy there for the VOD catalog? -Chris ___ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
