The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2005-May> msg00037



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

RE: Addressing PE/ CE Links - 2547

  • From: "Thamir M.Al Hammad" <thammad@stc.com.sa>
  • Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 09:32:20 +0300
  • Resent-Date: Sun, 22 May 2005 06:08:27 -0400
  • X-imss-result: Passed
  • X-imss-scores: Clean:99.90000 C:2 M:3 S:5 R:5
  • X-imss-settings: Baseline:1 C:1 M:1 S:1 R:1 (0.0000 0.0000)
  • X-imss-version: 2.025
  • X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by host.secure4-hosting.net id j4M9f7Hq018006
  • X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 May 2005 06:32:20.0707 (UTC) FILETIME=[01BC1330:01C55E98]
  • X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.45


Thanks Truman,

I would like to thank you for your prompt replay.
But I understand from the draft-guichard-pe-ce-addr-03.txt by Guichard,
that there is potential problem if same address space used in the
provider network and the customer. It pointed that this can be avoided
by NMS. However, I am not sure if this is practical.
So, do you think they did not found practical problem with using
private?

In the MPLS core, as you said, I sure their no problem of using the
private because of route distinguisher. 

Note: This draft has been absolute. So, I do not think you will find
this draft in IETF website. 

Best regards,

Thamir M Alhammad

-----Original Message-----
From: Truman Boyes [mailto:truman@suspicious.org]
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 2:10 PM
To: Thamir M.Al Hammad
Cc: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
Subject: Re: [MPLS-OPS]: Addressing PE/ CE Links - 2547

Hi Thamir,

The point-to-point interfaces are assigned by the provider, using 
private address space. The provider would manage the assignment 
across all their interfaces regardless of which VPN the interface 
would exist in. For internet connecting VPNs, the addresses assigned 
would be registered Internet numbers to ensure traceroutes / path MTU 
discovery work.

Route Distinguishers applied to routes advertised in the SP would 
prevent overlap issues in the core. Customer networks are free to 
advertise any routes they wish to use, except for the addresses 
assigned to their PE-CE links.

Cheers,
Truman



On 21/05/2005, at 10:51 PM, Thamir M.Al Hammad wrote:

>
> Hi Truman,
>
> If they are using private IP addresses, how they can guarantee no
> overlap in the addresses between the customers is happened?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Thamir M Alhammad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Truman Boyes [mailto:truman@suspicious.org]
> Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 1:37 AM
> To: mpls_buchaill@zen.co.uk
> Cc: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
> Subject: Re: [MPLS-OPS]: Addressing PE/ CE Links - 2547
>
> On 20/05/2005, at 2:26 AM, MPLS Buchaill wrote:
>
>
>> Hi Guys,
>>
>>
>>
>> There seems to be mixed opinion on what addressing should be
>> applied to PE-CE links for MPLS VPN. I know Jim Guichard
>> highlighted a lot of the common issues in his draft in 2003 but was
>> wondering what practical experience has shown?
>>
>>
>>
>> Just wondering what is the general experience and common practice
>> on a large scale, RFC1918, customer or registered?
>>
>>
>>
>> D
>>
> Many large carriers that I have worked with use private addressing
> for PE-CE links in MPLS VPNs. If the VPN is to provide internet
> connectivity, they will generally number the links with allocated and
> registered address space.
>
> As long as there is communication between the carrier and the
> customer and service recommendations are given, the odds of address
> conflict on various /31 prefixes is quite low.
>
> Truman
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>
> MPLScon 2005 - May 16-19, NYC, NY
> http://www.mplscon.com/
>
>
> DiscalimerThe information in this email and in any files 
> transmitted with it,
> is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/
> or privileged material.
> Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you receive 
> this in error,
> please contact the sender immediately and delete the material from 
> any computer.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, 
> distribution or
> any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is 
> strictly prohibited.
> Statement and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the 
> sender, and do not
> necessarily reflect those of STC.
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>



Disclaimer: The information in this email and in any files transmitted with it,
is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential and/or privileged material.
Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you receive this in error,
please contact the sender immediately and delete the material from any computer.
If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or
any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited.
Statement and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender, and do not
necessarily reflect those of STC.

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