Hello,
I recently faced to a strange problem, which i can't understand. Suppose
this network diagram:
MPLS Cloud --- PE (MX80) CE (EX4200) PE (MX80) MPLS Cloud.
As You can see, EX4200 has two uplinks to two MX80, which are part of
MPLS network infrastructure. VPLS
That's my thought too. However even the 12.3 VPLS configuration guide states
FEC128 multihoming. But again showing with BGP
Thanks
Darren
http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 23:30:08 +0300
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] VPLS Multihoming on Junos - FEC confusion
From: kr...@smartcom.bg
: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] VPLS Multihoming on Junos - FEC confusion
That's my thought too. However even the 12.3 VPLS configuration guide states
FEC128 multihoming. But again showing with BGP
Thanks
Darren
http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 23:30:08
I understand that part, but it doesn't answer the original question.
Thanks
Darren
http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie
From: per.gran...@gcc.com.cy
To: darre...@outlook.com; kr...@smartcom.bg
CC: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] VPLS Multihoming on Junos - FEC confusion
Date
, but it doesn't answer the original question.
Thanks
Darren
http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie
From: per.gran...@gcc.com.cy
To: darre...@outlook.com; kr...@smartcom.bg
CC: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [j-nsp] VPLS Multihoming on Junos - FEC confusion
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 13:20:17
Hello,
IMHO there is mess with docs/terms. FEC 128 multihoming as described has
nothing to do with ldp. It's bgp signaling and autodiscovery.
Krasi
On 8 September 2013 22:37, Darren O'Connor darre...@outlook.com wrote:
Hi list.
I'm going over the VPLS multihoming options on Juniper's
Hi list.
I'm going over the VPLS multihoming options on Juniper's web site. I'm not
concerned with LAG and MC-LAG for the moment.
As far as I'm aware, FEC128 is when you are using manual discovery of
pseudowires (LDP) - FEC129 is when you are using BGP auto-discovery.
Juniper techpub for
Hello,
I have two PE MX10 routers at each end of a connection and I have configured
them for VPLS multihoming.
I have one device configured as primary and one device configured as backup.
Everything is working as expected but I have a question regarding the PE in
backup mode.
So - my
On 2012-11-28, at 9:36 AM, Luca Salvatore l...@ninefold.com wrote:
So - my understanding is that VPLS multihoming is used to prevent layer 2
loops. How is this accomplished?
Is it because the backup PE device does not forward any traffic (except for
LDP stuff) and hence no loop is formed
: juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [j-nsp] VPLS Multihoming
On 2012-11-28, at 9:36 AM, Luca Salvatore l...@ninefold.com wrote:
So - my understanding is that VPLS multihoming is used to prevent layer 2
loops. How is this accomplished?
Is it because the backup PE device does not forward
Correct (Assuming each PE only has 1 Link to the CE Network…)
Chris
- Chairman of the STP is evil and should be avoided if possible Committee. =)
On 2012-11-28, at 1:24 PM, Luca Salvatore l...@ninefold.com wrote:
Right, this is what I thought. Thanks for the info.
So this type of
Luca,
My question is - on PE2 is it normal for it to show the VPLS connections
in a 'LN' (local site not designated) state, as shown below:
PE2show vpls connections
Layer-2 VPN connections:
snip
Legend for interface status
Up -- operational
Dn -- down
Instance: VPLS-DirectNetworks
Local
Hi Guys,
I've configured two MX routers (PE) to use VPLS multihoming.
Both PE routers connect into two EX4500's in VC mode
PE1 is configured as primary and PE2 is configured as backup
The config on each MX is:
PE1:
PE1 show configuration routing-instances
VPLS-DirectNetworks {
instance-type
13 matches
Mail list logo
