Re: [j-nsp] The P2MP LSP story when using LDP for VPLS?

2009-12-10 Thread Phill Jolliffe
All good things come to those who wait :-)

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-08
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


Re: [j-nsp] The P2MP LSP story when using LDP for VPLS?

2009-12-06 Thread Patrik Olsson
Yes, today P2MP can only be achieved with RSVP. Also, P2MP is thought
for a different application than VPLS perhaps. VPLS is bidirectional
any-to-any communication. P2MP is one-way from-on-to-many communication.

Patrik


Muhammad Asif Rao wrote:
 as far as i know this feature is not available yet. lsp is only p2p
 
 @$IF
 
 On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Clarke Morledge chm...@wm.edu wrote:
 
 I am in the process of building a VPLS implementation using LDP to build
 the LSPs but using BGP to handle the L2 signaling:

 I know that there is a dynamic way to configure point-to-multipoint (P2MP)
 LSPs when using RSVP with the provider-tunnel keyword for each VPLS
 routing instance , but I don't quite understand how to do this with LDP. I'm
 getting a little lost when reading this:


 http://jnpr.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.0/information-products/topic-collections/feature-guide/vpls-traffic-flooding-p2mp-lsp-solutions.html

 I see that there is some IETF draft work being done on P2MP for LDP:

 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-08

 Does this mean that dynamic P2MP LSPs for LDP with VPLS isn't available
 yet, or is there some other workaround?

 I'm having some difficulty trying to wrap my head around this.  The
 ultimate purpose is to cut down on unnecessary packet replication due to
 broadcast, multicast, and unknown unicast within VPLS.  I would rather not
 use RSVP since it is more complex to configure than LDP, but perhaps LDP
 isn't ready for P2MP for primetime?


 Clarke Morledge
 College of William and Mary
 Information Technology - Network Engineering
 Jones Hall (Room 18)
 Williamsburg VA 23187
 ___
 juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

 ___
 juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


-- 

//Patrik

Webkom
http://www.webkom.se

+46 (0)709 35 22 99
+46 (0)8 559 26 488


___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


Re: [j-nsp] The P2MP LSP story when using LDP for VPLS?

2009-12-06 Thread Stefan Fouant
 -Original Message-
 From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
 boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Patrik Olsson
 
 Yes, today P2MP can only be achieved with RSVP. Also, P2MP is thought
 for a different application than VPLS perhaps. VPLS is bidirectional
 any-to-any communication. P2MP is one-way from-on-to-many
 communication.

One can accomplish any-to-any communications with a series of one-to-many
tunnels from each ingress PE to each egress PE in the VPN set.  It's way
more efficient than having to build a whole bunch of one-to-one tunnels for
this type of application.

It's also used in some of the newer mVPN approaches such as those that use
selective or inclusive p2mp tunnels for building multicast distribution
trees.

Stefan Fouant
www.shortestpathfirst.net
GPG Key ID: 0xB5E3803D

___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


Re: [j-nsp] The P2MP LSP story when using LDP for VPLS?

2009-12-05 Thread Muhammad Asif Rao
as far as i know this feature is not available yet. lsp is only p2p

@$IF

On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 8:24 PM, Clarke Morledge chm...@wm.edu wrote:

 I am in the process of building a VPLS implementation using LDP to build
 the LSPs but using BGP to handle the L2 signaling:

 I know that there is a dynamic way to configure point-to-multipoint (P2MP)
 LSPs when using RSVP with the provider-tunnel keyword for each VPLS
 routing instance , but I don't quite understand how to do this with LDP. I'm
 getting a little lost when reading this:


 http://jnpr.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.0/information-products/topic-collections/feature-guide/vpls-traffic-flooding-p2mp-lsp-solutions.html

 I see that there is some IETF draft work being done on P2MP for LDP:

 http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-08

 Does this mean that dynamic P2MP LSPs for LDP with VPLS isn't available
 yet, or is there some other workaround?

 I'm having some difficulty trying to wrap my head around this.  The
 ultimate purpose is to cut down on unnecessary packet replication due to
 broadcast, multicast, and unknown unicast within VPLS.  I would rather not
 use RSVP since it is more complex to configure than LDP, but perhaps LDP
 isn't ready for P2MP for primetime?


 Clarke Morledge
 College of William and Mary
 Information Technology - Network Engineering
 Jones Hall (Room 18)
 Williamsburg VA 23187
 ___
 juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
 https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp

___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp


[j-nsp] The P2MP LSP story when using LDP for VPLS?

2009-12-03 Thread Clarke Morledge
I am in the process of building a VPLS implementation using LDP to build 
the LSPs but using BGP to handle the L2 signaling:


I know that there is a dynamic way to configure point-to-multipoint (P2MP) 
LSPs when using RSVP with the provider-tunnel keyword for each VPLS 
routing instance , but I don't quite understand how to do this with LDP. 
I'm getting a little lost when reading this:


http://jnpr.net/techpubs/en_US/junos10.0/information-products/topic-collections/feature-guide/vpls-traffic-flooding-p2mp-lsp-solutions.html

I see that there is some IETF draft work being done on P2MP for LDP:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-p2mp-08

Does this mean that dynamic P2MP LSPs for LDP with VPLS isn't available 
yet, or is there some other workaround?


I'm having some difficulty trying to wrap my head around this.  The 
ultimate purpose is to cut down on unnecessary packet replication due to 
broadcast, multicast, and unknown unicast within VPLS.  I would rather not 
use RSVP since it is more complex to configure than LDP, but perhaps LDP 
isn't ready for P2MP for primetime?



Clarke Morledge
College of William and Mary
Information Technology - Network Engineering
Jones Hall (Room 18)
Williamsburg VA 23187
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp