irtual-router' instead of
> 'routing-instance type vrf'
>
> Then you will not need 'domain-vpn-tag 0'.
>
> HTH,
> Ivan,
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 10:14 AM, vaibhava varma
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ivan
>>
>> I could not get the
external LSA to tag the routes and based on that to filter
> them on the other PE.
>
> Regards,
> Ivan,
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 1:08 PM, vaibhava varma wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ivan
>>
>> I finally got the routes on the VRF-Lite CE by using two commands
, then VRF lite CE
>> do not accept it. In case of Cisco as CE, there is a command to disable this
>> "capability vrf-lite". But with Juniper as CE, I am not aware but if there
>> is a CLI to disable this Down bit check that should do.
>>
>> thanks,
>>
the routes sent by PE2 are not arriving at PE4.
>
> If your config is correct, you need enable some traceoptions in the
> bgp session between pe2 and pe4 to investigate better.
>
> Regards
>
> On 7/12/12, vaibhava varma wrote:
>> Hi Diogo
>>
>> Yes the RR Config is
>
> Pls share the configs and outputs.
>
> Other thing, check if your lo0 filter is allowing the required
> protocols. But if you have problems here, then you should identify
> them in show bgp summ, show ldp session, sh rsvp session, etc
>
> Regards
>
> On 7/12/12, vaibhav
te for PE1. I think this may be
> your issue and this is why I suggested to check with the ping mpls ldp
> command.
>
> Thanks
>
> On 7/11/12, vaibhava varma wrote:
>> Hi Diogo
>>
>> They are not hidden and have already verified the route-target.Its
>> c
of the routes in PE4. If they are hidden it
> may be a LDP issue. If there is no hidden route then your problem may
> be wrong route-target selection.
>
> Thanks
>
> On 7/11/12, vaibhava varma wrote:
>> Hi Diogo
>>
>> I have not checked that yet but what I did
you have enabled vrf-table-lable under the routing-instances on the PEs?
> I remember that this could help. Not in such cases but you can give a shot.
>
> could you paste your expert VRF policy on PE2?
>
> Ivan,
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 2:16 PM, vaibhava varma wrote:
check and revert in sometime.
Regards
Varma
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Diogo Montagner
wrote:
> What happens if you do a ping mpls ldp from PE4-lo0 to PE1-lo0 ?
>
> On 7/11/12, vaibhava varma wrote:
>> Dear All
>>
>> I was testing a setup whereby I am using
t.0
rib to inet.3 on PE4 but still am not seeing routes.
I think the issue is that the BGP Next Hop is not in inet.3 for
PE2/RR. How can I achieve to make this setup working apart from
running LDP Tunneling over RSVP between PE4& PE2/RR or between PE3 &
PE2/RR.
--
Regards
Vai
Any pointers would be much appreciated.
Regards
Vaibhava Varma
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
msti 3 ...
>
> But I haven't tried a L3 config like yours, so it may work with
> MSTP...
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:26:27AM -0500, Chuck Anderson wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:25:18PM +0530, vaibhava varma wrote:
>> > In the Juniper EX-4500 series switc
Vaibhava Varma
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
HI Mark
Thanks again for sharing your views :-)
I was wondering whether mLDP with Junos has been out of roadmap and
now ready for field deployment ?
Regards
Varma
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Monday, December 26, 2011 10:37:12 PM vaibhava varma
> wrote:
>
ark Tinka wrote:
> On Monday, December 26, 2011 03:24:21 PM vaibhava varma
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the help so far..I tried to use
>> "ldp-tunneling" under RSVP TEs from PE-P to P-PE but it
>> does not works as I do not have LDP enabled anywhere to
>> tu
o_core1.pop2
State:
Local AS: 64513
Age: 4:19 Metric: 2
Area: 0.0.0.0
Task: OSPF
Announcement bits (1): 2-Resolve tree 1
AS path: I
Primary Routing Table inet.0
Than
nneling to
passtraffic between PEs when using broken LSPs ?
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Sunday, December 25, 2011 06:22:18 PM vaibhava varma
> wrote:
>
>> I am working on a requirement to enable the MPLS Backbone
>> with MPLS TE in such a way that I have LS
-
!
!
RR2
--
Regards
Vaibhava Varma
___
juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp
Dear All
Recently I was working on a scenario in OSPF for checking the use of
Backbone Area 0 for Inter-Area communication and I was surprised to
see that 2 Non-Backbone areas were able to exchange inter-area routes
without any Area 0 configured. Well the same thing did not work in
Cisco which wa
Hi All
I have a requirement in my typical LAN scenario whereby my LAN server
connects in a dual homed fashion to two different LAN switches from a third
party vendor. We are using vrrp for the server LAN. The two 3rd party vendor
switches are uplinked via L3 links to two ex-4500. We are tracking th
}
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 5:28 AM, Eric Van Tol wrote:
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: juniper-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net [mailto:juniper-nsp-
>>> boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of vaibhava varma
>>> Sent: Friday, September 23, 2011 7
Dear All
Is there is a possibility in Juniper MX-960 to configure the same
Physical Port to support L2 Bridging ie Trunk Link and also configure
same time for L3 Routing ie Sub-interfaces.
It would look something like this as listed below
{master}[edit]
root@Junos# set interfaces ae1 unit 0 fami
22 matches
Mail list logo
