Hi Rob, As per RFC, bridges must appear to EVPN PEs as a LAG. In essence, you need to configure MC-LAG (facing EVPN PEs) on the switches facing EVPN PEs, if you have multiple switches facing EVPN-PEs. Switches doesn’t need to be from Juniper, so MC-LAG on the switches doesn’t need to be Juniper-flavored. If you have single switch facing EVPN PEs -> simple LAG (with members towards different EVPN PEs) on that single switch is OK.
Thanks, Krzysztof > On 2019-Apr-18, at 08:35, Rob Foehl <r...@loonybin.net> wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, Krzysztof Szarkowicz wrote: > >> Hi Rob, >> RFC 7432, Section 8.5: >> >> If a bridged network is multihomed to more than one PE in an EVPN >> network via switches, then the support of All-Active redundancy mode >> requires the bridged network to be connected to two or more PEs using >> a LAG. >> So, have you MC-LAG (facing EVPN PEs) configured on your switches? > > No, hence the question... I'd have expected ESI-LAG to be relevant for EVPN, > and in this case it's not a single "CE" device but rather an entire layer 2 > domain. For a few of those, Juniper-flavored MC-LAG isn't an option, anyway. > In any case, it's not clear what 8.5 means by "must be connected using a > LAG" -- from only one device in said bridged network? > > -Rob _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
