Jo,

I don't know that there is a normal one! As far as ease of configuration B2B
VRF is the easiest, everything else is some form of External MP-BGP (with
options for send-label, multi-hop, next-hop-self).

On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Jo Knight <[email protected]> wrote:

> Thanks Bryan,
>
> I dont have that book, but think I just found my next purchase.
>
> What one is the 'normal' one - I know this has no bearing for the CCIE lab,
> so its best to know all of the options.
>
> Jo
>
> 2009/9/9 Bryan Bartik <[email protected]>
>
> Jo,
>>
>> This is what I found as well. Basically there are multiple scenarios for
>> option B, also know as option 2. In the book "MPLS Configuration on IOS
>> Software" this particular scenario is described as "Option 2a: ASBR-ASBR
>> Approach Using Next-Hop-Self Method" on page 288.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Francisco <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>  I think what is saving the day is that you have the ‘next-hop-self’ for
>>> the iBGP sessions. As  you’ve already got MPLS Between the ASBR and PE’s,
>>> the FEC/FIB should be properly tagged.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you didn’t include next-hop-self, then you’ll need send-label between
>>> the ASBRs so the PE’s could do the tagging for the end  to end LSP.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Play around with those configs and compare the results for both sets
>>> with:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> show ip bgp vpn all labels
>>>
>>> show mpls forwarding
>>>
>>> show ip bgp labels
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW: Anybody doing the exam on RTP on the 30th Sep?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Francisco
>>>
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/fbaena
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Jo Knight [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> *Sent:* 09 September 2009 09:45
>>> *To:* Bryan Bartik
>>> *Cc:* Francisco; [email protected]; [email protected]
>>> *Subject:* Re: [OSL | CCIE_SP] Inter-AS VPN Option B and send-label
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please
>>> visit www.ipexpert.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.76/2345 - Release Date:
>>> 09/08/09 20:45:00
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Bryan Bartik
>> CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
>> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
>> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Bryan Bartik
CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP
Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
_______________________________________________
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit 
www.ipexpert.com

Reply via email to