The MPLS-OPS Archive[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]
Hej Krzysiek, > Why 128 bytes? Should it rather be variable size, depending on which optional attributes are attached to the prefix? No - neither paths nor attributes are copied physically. We point from the copied b_net to the original paths & attributes therefor the size of the b_net is constant. > > > > > 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? True, but only in the case when existing RT assinment is sufficient. All I am saying that when I would have a choice to add a new set of communities (my existing ones do not provider enough granularity) I would prefer to use regular communities rather then extended to save my RAM in all PEs & RRs passing or using those routes. R. ------- The MPLS-OPS Mailing List Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
|
|