What you are talking about can only be done on ONE device, at least for L3VPN. This is using multiprotocol BGP without VPNV4 bgp - which is fun in a lab, but quite useless in the real world.
Jeremy Stretch did a good write-up on this http://packetlife.net/blog/2010/mar/29/inter-vrf-routing-vrf-lite/ You may need to use vrf lite + physical cables, or a dirty combination of the above, but I wouldn't recommend it. -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of James Bensley Sent: Tuesday, October 4, 2016 11:36 AM To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP with MPLS On 4 October 2016 at 04:00, Maile Halatuituia <maile.halatuit...@tcc.to> wrote: > Hi > > Can i do BGP without MPLS between my two PE routers. > > My question is to my understabd that BGP carry the means of reachability > between the two PE but it is the mpls actually carry the traffic. Can someone > correct me if i am wrong or suggest any best approach to this. > > The reason is that my PE router does not support MPLS . > > Hope to hear you soon. I'm not sure I fully understand you. You can run multiprotocol BGP between two PEs to exchange routes between them however if the PEs don't support MPLS and you are trying to create L2 and/or L3 VPNs you will be hard pushed to get any traffic flowing :) Normally MP-BGP would assign an MPLS label value and advertise the prefix and label to the neighbouring PE. If your PEs don't support MPLS I guess a label might not even be allocated by BGP so they might not even advertise the prefix. Cheers, James. _______________________________________________ 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/ _______________________________________________ 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/
