because I have a partial implementation of MPLS routers. Whether the routers support MPLS or not, the routing on an OSPF level doesn't depend on MPLS being enabled. Eventually everything will be MPLS-capable. The MPLS network is not multiple-path. The OSPF network is.
On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.ti...@seacom.mu> wrote: > > On 6/Feb/15 00:31, Eric Louie wrote: > > I work for a fixed wireless provider, and our mpls-capable backhauls are > > all running mpls with 9200 MTU with no problem. The only weirdness I > > encounter is if I have multiple equal-cost routes to the same location, > one > > over MPLS and one not, end up having ping/unreachable issues from my > > monitoring equipment. The solution has been to cost one path (the MPLS) > > lower than the other. The only other problem I had was with radio's that > > didn't support larger 9000+ byte MTU packets - we've phased that radio > out > > for now. if you run MPLS with 1500 byte MTU, you'll have issues with > 1500 > > byte packets with the DF-bit set. That was a nasty discovery in the > > production network, your mileage will not vary with that problem. > > I'm curious why you'd have multiple paths in your network (equal-cost to > boot) where some support and others don't. > > Mark. >
