subject:"\[j\-nsp\] RE\- RT configuration for L2 VPN and L3 VPN"

Re: [j-nsp] RE- RT configuration for L2 VPN and L3 VPN

2007-09-27 Thread Monika M

When it is going to be totally different address family, why should we maintain uniqueness. I agree that we should configure unique RT for the each VPN of a type. Monika On 9/28/07, P.Narayana Swamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Monika, > > Each VRF needs a unique RT( Either L2 or L3 VPN > )

Re: [j-nsp] RE- RT configuration for L2 VPN and L3 VPN

2007-09-27 Thread senad palislamovic

: P.Narayana Swamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2007 6:13:32 PM Subject: [j-nsp] RE- RT configuration for L2 VPN and L3 VPN Hi Monika, Each VRF needs a unique RT( Either L2 or L3 VPN ),since it imports the route based on

[j-nsp] RE- RT configuration for L2 VPN and L3 VPN

2007-09-27 Thread P.Narayana Swamy

Hi Monika, Each VRF needs a unique RT( Either L2 or L3 VPN ),since it imports the route based on the RT community. Regards, Swamy Should the route target be unique if a set of PEs provide both VPLS and L3 VPN services? To be more elaborate, PE(rs)-1---