Re: [j-nsp] Enable EVPN on existing mpls l3vpn network

I love my bgp route reflector cluster... all my pe's neighbor with 2 bgp rr cluster members... anytime I want to add an address family to a pe, I add it to one rr cluster neighbor session, it bounces, once routes have been relearned over it, I add the af to the other rr neighbor session... No

Re: [j-nsp] Enable EVPN on existing mpls l3vpn network

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 4:14 AM, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: > > tim tiriche > > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 6:44 PM > > > > Hello, > > > > I have an existing L3VPN network with NSR. > > > > If i want to enable EVPN, is it just a matter of enabling family evpn >

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

> Dan Peachey > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 11:07 AM > > Cisco often call this PIC core (hierarchical FIB). I think the different terms > used by the different vendors causes some confusion. From what I > understand... > > Cisco: > > H-FIB = PIC Core > Node protection = PIC Edge Node

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

> Raphael Mazelier > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 10:55 PM > > Very interresting topic. > > Some questions about your setup : > > In 2) you set advertise-external, is it working the same by using multipath ? > No Multipath between iBGP paths would be similar to 'protect core' Multipath

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

On 19/02/2016 10:53, Alexander Marhold wrote: Hi You wrote: One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that routers need indirect-nexthop feature enabled IMHO exactly this is also called PIC (prefix independent convergence) so to be exact to get a prefix amount independent convergence

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

Hi You wrote: >One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that routers need indirect-nexthop >feature enabled IMHO exactly this is also called PIC (prefix independent convergence) so to be exact to get a prefix amount independent convergence you need a pointer to a

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

Advertise-external or more general Additional Path capability (would prefer this if new install) could be used to distribute selected few routes if FIB space is of concern. One thing I haven't seen mentioned is that routers need indirect-nexthop feature enabled, which should be by default enabled

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

> Alexander Marhold [mailto:alexander.marh...@gmx.at] > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 6:50 PM > > Hi folks > > To make the discussion clearer and comming back to the Juniper MX 104 > implementation > > Here is a picture of 2 PEs on P and 2 peers (ISP1 and IX1) let´s assume we > want to prefer

Re: [j-nsp] Optimizing the FIB on MX

Hello, "condition" is not supported in forwarding-table export policy, only in BGP/IGP export policy. You have to insert a "BGP-exporter" intermediate node between peer|upstream and Your MX, this could be a logical system on MX itself. Thx Alex On 18/02/2016 10:14, Vincent Bernat wrote: ❦

Re: [j-nsp] Enable EVPN on existing mpls l3vpn network

> tim tiriche > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2016 6:44 PM > > Hello, > > I have an existing L3VPN network with NSR. > > If i want to enable EVPN, is it just a matter of enabling family evpn > signalling > on the bgp neighbors? > > Will doing so, cause a session reset or affect existing production