On 21/Mar/19 17:43, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Well, the Internet is full of examples and recommendations of an IGP
> (most often OSPF) being used between PE and CE, so it must be common
> practice. In fact, OSPF even has special enhancements for this very
> purpose.
I remember reading about it
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019, at 17:13, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Still, the answer to my initial and direct question about IS-IS is...
> "yes" or "no"?
"Avoid".
If you can't run a separate instance for the customer, "NO".
--
R.-A. Feurdean
___
cisco-nsp
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019, at 16:45, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Well, the Internet is full of examples and recommendations of an IGP
> (most often OSPF) being used between PE and CE, so it must be common
> practice. In fact, OSPF even has special enhancements for this very
> purpose.
It is not uncommon,
> From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer)
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 10:35 AM
>
> Robert Raszuk wrote:
> > Hi Victor,
> >
> > ISIS has analogy to OSPF down bit integrated if this was your question.
>
> Hopefully it is.
>
> > But
> > do check with your implementation to
--- Begin Message ---
Robert Raszuk wrote:
> Hi Victor,
>
> ISIS has analogy to OSPF down bit integrated if this was your question.
Hopefully it is.
> But
> do check with your implementation to make sure if it supports ISIS
leaking.
>
> PE-CE
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 at 02:31, Victor Sudakov wrote:
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> OSPF as a PE-CE protocol has some useful features: the "DN bit" for loop
> prevention and sham links for route optimization.
>
> Does IS-IS have similar features?
Hi Victor,
Someone has already mentioned that IS-IS has
Robert Raszuk wrote:
> Hi Victor,
>
> ISIS has analogy to OSPF down bit integrated if this was your question.
Hopefully it is.
> But
> do check with your implementation to make sure if it supports ISIS leaking.
>
> PE-CE ISIS is inheriting loop prevention which was defined for ISIS route
>
Hi Victor,
ISIS has analogy to OSPF down bit integrated if this was your question. But
do check with your implementation to make sure if it supports ISIS leaking.
PE-CE ISIS is inheriting loop prevention which was defined for ISIS route
leaking between levels in RFC2966
" This document
Robert Raszuk wrote:
> > >
> > > A protocol designed to speak between 2 different autonomous systems.
> > >
> > > If that is not an option, not using a routing protocol is also a good
> > > idea, i.e., static routing.
> >
> > Well, the Internet is full of examples and recommendations of an IGP
> >
21, 2019 8:11 AM
To: Aaron Gould
Cc: Michael Hallgren; Mark Tinka; Cisco-nsp
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IS-IS as PE-CE protocol
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:02 AM Aaron Gould wrote:
Which reminds me... I recall if pe-ce is bgp, then redis into l3vpn is natural
and automatic true ?
-Aaron
Yes - the examples are there on the net for most BGP resistant customers
and non managed CPEs ... But as others already said all biggest SPs which
are still offering L3VPNs are only doing BGP and static.
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 4:45 PM Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Mark Tinka wrote:
> >
> > >
Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> > Because the customer network is all IS-IS ?
> > What would be "not shooting myself in the foot" in this case?
>
> A protocol designed to speak between 2 different autonomous systems.
>
> If that is not an option, not using a routing protocol is also a good
> idea, i.e.,
Nick Cutting wrote:
> But I think the discussion is not the CE-PE IGP relationship that gets
> put into a L3VPN, then tunneled via MPLS, but connecting the CE to his
> internal IS-IS
No, it is not.
--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/
> Nathan Lannine
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 1:11 PM
>
> CE protocol for L3VPN, but here we are. So, in the case of BGP as PE-CE
> protocol and a small client AS, do you all in the provider space require
> multiple private ASNs per VPN?
>
That's one of the options.
The other is to use the
Message-
From: cisco-nsp On Behalf Of Nathan Lannine
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 9:11 AM
To: Aaron Gould
Cc: Cisco-nsp
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] IS-IS as PE-CE protocol
This message originates from outside of your organisation.
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:02 AM Aaron Gould wrote:
> Wh
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:02 AM Aaron Gould wrote:
> Which reminds me... I recall if pe-ce is bgp, then redis into l3vpn is
> natural and automatic true ?
>
> -Aaron
>
>
As an implementer of MPLS/L3VPN in the enterprise, this is very interesting
to me because I am all IGP internally. I sort
Which reminds me... I recall if pe-ce is bgp, then redis into l3vpn is natural
and automatic true ?
-Aaron
___
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at
Le 2019-03-21 07:31, Mark Tinka a écrit :
On 21/Mar/19 08:06, Victor Sudakov wrote:
Because the customer network is all IS-IS ?
What would be "not shooting myself in the foot" in this case?
BGP is your natural friend here, IMHO.
mh
A protocol designed to speak between 2 different
On 21/Mar/19 08:06, Victor Sudakov wrote:
> Because the customer network is all IS-IS ?
> What would be "not shooting myself in the foot" in this case?
A protocol designed to speak between 2 different autonomous systems.
If that is not an option, not using a routing protocol is also a good
adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote:
> >
> > OSPF as a PE-CE protocol has some useful features: the "DN bit" for loop
> > prevention and sham links for route optimization.
> >
> > Does IS-IS have similar features?
> >
> It does if the PE end is L2 and CE end is L1,
Sorry if I misunderstand,
> Victor Sudakov
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 2:30 AM
>
> Dear Colleagues,
>
> OSPF as a PE-CE protocol has some useful features: the "DN bit" for loop
> prevention and sham links for route optimization.
>
> Does IS-IS have similar features?
>
It does if the PE end is L2 and CE end is L1,
Dear Colleagues,
OSPF as a PE-CE protocol has some useful features: the "DN bit" for loop
prevention and sham links for route optimization.
Does IS-IS have similar features?
--
Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/
22 matches
Mail list logo
