Re: [j-nsp] Longest Match for LDP (RFC5283)

Aah yes of course in-path RRs with NHS would do :) Cheers, adam netconsultings.com ::carrier-class solutions for the telecommunications industry:: From: Krzysztof Szarkowicz [mailto:kszarkow...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2018 4:46 PM To: adamv0...@netconsultings.com Cc:

Re: [j-nsp] Longest Match for LDP (RFC5283)

You can turn ABR to inline Route Reflector and change the next-hop to self when reflecting the routes to access PE. Thus, access PE will require loopbacks of ABRs only. Sent from handheld device. Sorry for typos. On Tue, Jul 31, 2018, 16:29 wrote: > > Of Krzysztof Szarkowicz > > Sent: Monday,

Re: [j-nsp] 6PE without family inet6 labeled-unicast

Hi Aaron, Possibly it could, but it definitely needs to be checked and tested about possibility of unequal load-balancing. As far as next-hop tooling required anyway to process those prefixes in a different way than other announced from PEs, and traffic is actually sent via rsvp tunnels,

Re: [j-nsp] Longest Match for LDP (RFC5283)

> 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 wrote: > > > > On 30 July 2018 at 15:22, Krzysztof Szarkowicz > wrote: > >> James, > >>