The MPLS-OPS Archive

[Spice Sylvia <falsesylvia@yahoo.co.uk>]

hello friends,
> > 
> > Not necessarily. If the motive is to provide the
> transport service, then
> > CsC is still the way to go.
> > Whether the ASN values are the same or not usually
> has no relevance to
> > the above conclusion.
> 
> Yeap.I go agress about this. Even public or private
> ASN can be done
> without overlapping ip addresses :)
> 
> > And this is no different from the usual VPN
> service. Think of it as the
> > following -
> >  1) If the VPN customer has the same ASN in all
> the sites, then the SP
> > need to use "as-override"

To comphend this I was trying this in my lab:

AS1-------AS2---------AS1
|          |           |
 ---------AS3----------

so AS2 and AS3 are carrier of carriers?

When I do AS1 over ride on AS1 routers, and I withdraw
a prefix from the left side AS1, the above topology
does not seem to converge :(, the one on the right
still advertises it :(

I think it must be a configuration issue?



> >      to facilitate the CE routes being accepted at
> the other CEs.
> >  2) If the VPN customer has unique ASN in each
> site, then the SP doesn't
> > need to use
> >      any special knob, since BGP (at the CE) would
> accept the remote
> > site routes just fine.
> 



	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

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