hi all:
Is JUNOS NOT support MP-EBGP that use direct interface as neighbor without
enable family mpls at both sides of direct interface because of NON-MPLS
enabled interface DON'T transmit labeled packet?
My lab topo is
R1(CE)--R2(PE)--R3(P)--R4(PE)--R5(PE)--R6(P)--R7(PE)--R8(CE).R1,R2,R3,R4 are in
the same AS, while R5,R6,R7,R8 are in the same AS.
Between R4 and R5 I use MP-EBGP to transit MPLS/VPN traffic. they use direct
interface as update-source, and that interface is NOT enabled MPLS. The route
gose well in this lab, but I failed to ping R8 from R1, I go though the label
from R2 to R7, the only problem is between R4 and R5,here is the output of R4's
'show route 8.8.8.8 detail'
r4.inet.0: 4 destinations, 4 routes (4 active, 0 holddown, 0 hidden)8.8.8.8/32
(1 entry, 1 announced) *BGP Preference: 170/-101 Route
Distinguisher: 65412:7 Next-hop reference count: 6
Source: 5.5.5.5 Next hop: 10.0.45.5 via xxx, selected
Label operation: Push 1024 Protocol next hop: 5.5.5.5
Push 1024 Indirect next hop: 85d1200 131073
State: <Secondary Active Ext> Local AS: 65412 Peer AS: 1111
Age: 25:11 Metric2: 1 Task:
BGP_1111.5.5.5.5+179 Announcement bits (1): 0-KRT
AS path: 1111 I Communities: target:65412:123
VPN Label: 1024 Localpref: 100 Router ID: 5.5.5.5
Primary Routing Table bgp.l3vpn.0
It seems that R4 is pushing label '1024' and put the labeled packet out of it's
interface xxx. if R5 receive this label and accept it, the whole path will be
fine, and ping test should be success.So I think is the above issue cause ping
failed, I wonder if my opinion is right?
By the way, I made a test use multihop MP-EBGP between R4 and R5 with loopback
interface as update-source, and enable MPLS on direct connected interface. I
successed made ping from R1 to R8.
thanks!
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 中文网，最新时尚生活资讯，白领聚集门户。
http://cn.msn.com
_______________________________________________
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
