On 9 October 2017 at 12:49, Aaron Gould <aar...@gvtc.com> wrote: > Ah. I think I might be on to something. I see that when I do a BGP VPLS > (fec 128, rfc 4761) style config, then I do NOT see the pw's active between > the non-designated-forwarding multi-homed pe's... and, this seems to be > automatic. (no mhoming config needed in my lab) It seems in that link there > is some typos with explaining BGP VPLS and LDP VPLS. Seems that it explains > on BGP Signals PW's under the section of the document pertaining to LDP > VPLS, so it confuses the reader. It seems that someone should correct that > document.
I tried reading through the links and it wasn't making sense to me, now that you say that, it does make more sense. At first I thought you were confusing LDP signalled VPLS with BGP signalled VPLS but yeah I see now that the Juniper documentation is in fact incorrect :) I was trying to work out the mechanism for signalling the non-designated-forwarding PE-CE link to go operationally "down" (I'm used to VPLS on Cisco kit). This isn’t in RFC4761 so is this a Juniper custom extension? Cheers, James. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp