The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2002-Mar> msg00125



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Re: VRFs on ASBRs with inter-AS VPNs[sic]

  • From: "Krzysztof Szarkowicz" <kszarkowicz@freemail.hu>
  • Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 21:29:51 +0100
  • Cc: "Mpls-Ops \(E-mail\)" <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
  • Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:06:43 -0500
  • To: <raszuk@cisco.com>
  • X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by host.secure4-hosting.net id g2IAoMW15081
  • X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Mar 2002 10:50:16.0830 (UTC) FILETIME=[B0A149E0:01C1CE6A]
  • X-Originating-IP: [144.254.13.54]

Hi,
> 
> > ASBR with dummy VRF will have one route twice ( if you using RD per vrf),
> 
> How are you going to limit the number of routes into vrf to one ? Such a
> vrf will have all which match the import RT. Of course if those have
> different RD then you are waisting 128 bytes per bgp_net more.
> 

Why 128 bytes? Should it rather be variable size, depending on which optional attributes are attached to the prefix?

> > > > A) Have a special single bgp community for exportable to inter-as peer
> > > > vpnv4 routes - you set the filter once on ASBR and done.
> > > >

If I have vpnv4 peering with different AS-es and each of my neigboring AS would need different set of vpnv4 prefixes, it would mean that I need to create so many special communities as many vpnv4 inter-as peerings I have. Is it not better to base the inbound filter on ASBR on RTs, instead of this special community?

Krzysztof

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml