Thanks for your replies I think there was a confusion in my query. My question was to understand why Route distinguisher is proposed in VPLS NLRI? What is the use of sending RD in the NLRI?
With MP-BGP, there are two extensions for VPN application. 1 - L3VPN (RFC 4364) and L2 VPN (RFC 4761) both of them have Route distinguisher in the NLRI. The purpose of using Route distinguisher in L3 VPN is clear. But in 4761, the purpose RD servers is not clear. Monika On 6/26/07, xinyu zeng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Monika, > > You can check with RFC 4761. Generally, NLRI for VPLS format is as > following: > > +------------------------------------+ > | Length (2 octets) | > +------------------------------------+ > | Route Distinguisher (8 octets)| > +------------------------------------+ > | VE ID (2 octets) | > +------------------------------------+ > | VE Block Offset (2 octets)| > +------------------------------------+ > | VE Block Size (2 octets)| > +------------------------------------+ > | Label Base (3 octets) | > +------------------------------------+ > > MAC address is not in the NLRI as L3VPN. So your can't expect to carry mac > tables in NLRI. MAC learning is by flooding in L2VPN, not by carried in > MPBGP as L3VPN. > > On 6/26/07, Monika M <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > In L3VPN, The purpose of the Route Distinguisher is solely to > > allow one to create distinct routes to a common IPv4 address prefix. > > > > But why do we need Route distinguisher for VPLS? > > > > Was this added to VPLS to be consistent with L3VPN? > > > > > > -Monika > > _______________________________________________ > > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > > > > > > -- > Best Regards, > Yours Xinyu.Zeng _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
