The problem for me is that the 6500 seems to do it even if you don't have MPLS enabled. The fact that you are running BGP inside VRF causes it to generate labels. If I can run IGP inside VRF why then does BGP running inside VRF automatically assuming we want to do MPLS or L3VPN? More to the root of your question, the problem for me is TCAM consumption and there is some label scanning process that is adding about 20% utilization to my CPU. I am carrying full I1 routes and that is a lot of labels.
-----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Phil Mayers Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2010 5:04 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] inet vrf On 17/03/10 00:09, Tim Durack wrote: > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Manu Chao<linux.ya...@gmail.com> wrote: >> This feature is a nice label allocation optimisation, are you using this >> command on RTR-2? > > Yes, both routers of a pair. Seems to me like it should really be the > default behavior. > Why? Obviously it's a label space optimisation for places with lots of LSPs but I'm honestly curious - what's the downside of generating an LSP for routes with next-hops? _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
