Thanks Shaughn, Why do I need labels for the loopbacks between the ASs? The eBGP peering between the ASBRs is over the directly connected network - so didnt think there was any need for each AS to know about the others internal addressing.
Im just starting to go through these, so maybe I am missing something somewhere. Jo 2009/9/9 Shaughn Smith <[email protected]> > You are more than likely getting the labels for the VPNV4 routers, but what > about IP's that are in the global table, ie the Loopbacks etc. As far as i > am aware you need to enable an IPV4 session with the send-label command to > get labels for the routes in the Global routing table, not just the routes > in that specific VRF. > > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Jo Knight <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Guys, >> >> Im just working though an Option B lab and have VPNv4 configured between >> ASBRs. I do not have an IPv4 session between the ASBRs and it is working >> fine and I am getting the labels on the PE routers (R3 and R6), nor do I >> have mpls enabled between them. >> >> If we need to send-label between ASBRs does that mean we need to activate >> IPv4 between them? >> >> R2 and R4 are the two ASBRs in AS1 and AS2 respectively: >> >> R2 ASBR BGP Config >> router bgp 1 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> no bgp default route-target filter >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor 150.50.24.4 remote-as 2 >> neighbor 200.0.0.3 remote-as 1 >> neighbor 200.0.0.3 update-source Loopback0 >> ! >> address-family vpnv4 >> neighbor 150.50.24.4 activate >> neighbor 150.50.24.4 send-community extended >> neighbor 200.0.0.3 activate >> neighbor 200.0.0.3 next-hop-self >> neighbor 200.0.0.3 send-community extended >> exit-address-family >> >> >> >> R4 ASBR BGP Config >> router bgp 2 >> no bgp default ipv4-unicast >> no bgp default route-target filter >> bgp log-neighbor-changes >> neighbor 150.50.24.2 remote-as 1 >> neighbor 200.0.0.6 remote-as 2 >> neighbor 200.0.0.6 update-source Loopback0 >> ! >> address-family vpnv4 >> neighbor 150.50.24.2 activate >> neighbor 150.50.24.2 send-community extended >> neighbor 200.0.0.6 activate >> neighbor 200.0.0.6 send-community extended >> neighbor 200.0.0.6 next-hop-self >> exit-address-family >> ! >> >> >> Thanks, >> Jo >> >> >> 2009/8/7 Bryan Bartik <[email protected]> >> >>> Thanks guys. I didn't have LDP enabled between the ASes. I just >>> reviewed the configuration guide for Inter-as mpls vpn with vpnv4 exchange >>> between asbrs and they don't use it either. >>> >>> >>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_vpn_connect_asbr_ps6350_TSD_Products_Configuration_Guide_Chapter.html >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 3:52 AM, Francisco <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Did you check if you had 'mpls ip' enabled on the interface connecting >>>> to >>>> the eBGP neighbour? >>>> >>>> As you know there are 3 ways for MPLS to exchange labels: >>>> >>>> - LDP >>>> - BGP >>>> - RSVP-TE >>>> >>>> If you've been enabling mpls on the interfaces connecting eBGP >>>> neighbours, >>>> then they've changed labels anyway and the send-label command is >>>> redundant. >>>> >>>> I had the same situation with a mock lab in the INE bootcamp. I had >>>> Option B >>>> working but I was not giving the points because I had not use >>>> send-label, >>>> even though everything is working (which is why you don't notice any >>>> problems :) >>>> >>>> Considering how picky is the script during the exam I would advise you >>>> to >>>> use send-label for Option B. >>>> >>>> For what I've heard the script sometimes checks the output of >>>> pre-determine >>>> show commands, but as well seeks for specific entries in the >>>> configuration, >>>> so careful there. >>>> >>>> All the best, >>>> Francisco >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >>>> Bryan Bartik >>>> Sent: 07 August 2009 03:00 >>>> To: [email protected]; [email protected] >>>> Subject: Inter-AS VPN Option B and send-label >>>> >>>> I have seen some example of option B (ASBRs exchanging VPNv4 routes) and >>>> send-label being used...however I have it working without it. I doubt it >>>> is >>>> needed because the ASBR's share their own local label for VPN routes >>>> with >>>> each other and this put in their LFIB. The FEC is actually a VPNv4 >>>> route. >>>> >>>> Topology: >>>> R1-R2 are AS100 >>>> R6,R7 are AS200 >>>> R3 is in VRF >>>> R1 ---- R5 ---- | ---- R6 ---- R7 ---- vrf ---- R3 >>>> >>>> From R6: >>>> Local Outgoing Prefix >>>> 604 703 200:1:3.3.3.3/32 >>>> >>>> From R5: >>>> Local Outgoing Prefix >>>> 505 604 200:1:3.3.3.3/32 >>>> >>>> No routers have send-label and everything works fine. Is there a reason >>>> I >>>> see send-label used with option B? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Bryan Bartik >>>> CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP >>>> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. >>>> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> >>>> >>>> _____________________________________________________________________ >>>> Subscription information: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/comserv.html >>>> >>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >>>> Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.16/2240 - Release Date: >>>> 08/06/09 >>>> 05:57:00 >>>> >>>> _____________________________________________________________________ >>>> Subscription information: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/comserv.html >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Bryan Bartik >>> CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP >>> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. >>> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please >>> visit www.ipexpert.com >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please >> visit www.ipexpert.com >> >> >
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
