MPLS VPN design - RR in forwarding path?

[Mark Tinka]

On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:54:32 AM Jeff Tantsura wrote:

> You don't need LDP on RR as long as clients support "not
> on lsp" flag (different implementation have different
> names for it)

The hack needed when running a Junos-based RR in an MPLS 
network to allow route reflection of l3vpn routes on an RR 
not running MPLS.

For IOS and IOS XE (and IOS XR, I think), this wouldn't be 
needed as unlike Juniper, Cisco don't treat MPLS signaling 
protocols as (pseudo) routing protocols.

> There are more and more reasons to run RR
> on a non router HW, there are many reasons to still run
> commercial code base, mostly feature set and resilience.

+1.

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20150102/91cf362c/attachment.sig>