Re: [c-nsp] L2VPN with IP address
Hi,
On 16 July 2010 18:49, Asbjorn Hojmark - Lists wrote:
{cut}
>
> You can do that with 'routed pseudowires' on 7600 with ES+
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2sr/release/notes/122SRrn.html#wp3970796
>
Thank you. That's looks like a winner to me :-)
kind regards
Pshem
___
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/
Re: [c-nsp] L2VPN with IP address
On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 12:40:17 +1200, you wrote: > I > could get a xconnect going between one of the bigger boxes and the > small PE, without actually wasting port on the bigger router (by > having some sort of logical interface) then I could run the BGP > session directly. I had a look on Cisco website, but either it's not > possible or that kind of bridging has a special name that I can't pin > down. If you've heard of such feature - please let me know. You can do that with 'routed pseudowires' on 7600 with ES+ http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2sr/release/notes/122SRrn.html#wp3970796 -A ___ 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/
Re: [c-nsp] L2VPN with IP address
Pshem Kowalczyk wrote: > Hi, > > I have a situation, where a customer wants a full BGP table > (persuasion failed already), but is connected to small router (2821), > with not enough memory to get anywhere near full table. I have few > other routers (ASR1K, 7600) that would normally be used for that, but > are in far-away locations. Of course I can set up a local BGP session > and then add a multihop one for the full feed, but that doesn't seem > like an elegant solution any more. All the routers run MPLS, so if I > could get a xconnect going between one of the bigger boxes and the > small PE, without actually wasting port on the bigger router (by > having some sort of logical interface) then I could run the BGP > session directly. I had a look on Cisco website, but either it's not > possible or that kind of bridging has a special name that I can't pin > down. If you've heard of such feature - please let me know. To not answer the question directly, you can put enough memory in a 2821 to take a full table easily - they'll support 1Gb. Regards Pete ___ 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/
[c-nsp] L2VPN with IP address
Hi, I have a situation, where a customer wants a full BGP table (persuasion failed already), but is connected to small router (2821), with not enough memory to get anywhere near full table. I have few other routers (ASR1K, 7600) that would normally be used for that, but are in far-away locations. Of course I can set up a local BGP session and then add a multihop one for the full feed, but that doesn't seem like an elegant solution any more. All the routers run MPLS, so if I could get a xconnect going between one of the bigger boxes and the small PE, without actually wasting port on the bigger router (by having some sort of logical interface) then I could run the BGP session directly. I had a look on Cisco website, but either it's not possible or that kind of bridging has a special name that I can't pin down. If you've heard of such feature - please let me know. kind regards Pshem ___ 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/
