The MPLS-OPS Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] RE: Addressing PE/ CE Links - 2547
We advise the customers that by default we will allocate the p-to-p links from a high 10-dot range, which has rarely been a problem for customers, given that the p-to-p links are largely transparent to customers once the link is up and working, and just about everyone starts from the low-end of 10-dot or uses 192. If the customer has reserved the whole 10-dot range globally, as has been the case, we ask them to move to a 172 range. This way, the provider has control over the IP addressing which makes sense, when using private space, as it makes troubleshooting easy when you can refer to your own uniquely addressed centralised database (which in fact can be as simple as a sequential spreadsheet if you don't have the resources to develop your own). It also helps the NOC quickly identify with links. And it also means that if you have UNIX boxes which poll end-devices sitting in management VPNs that don't talk VPNIPv4, then they can poll unique addresses without problem. I would suggest strongly against not having any policy allowing the customers to allocate their own addresses for p-to-p links. Don't waste global address space on private links. Cheers, Julian Breen SPTCOM -----Original Message----- From: M. ELK [mailto:elkou141061@hotmail.com] Sent: Sunday, 22 May 2005 12:15 AM To: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com Subject: Re: [MPLS-OPS]: Addressing PE/ CE Links - 2547 >From: josmon <josmon@rigozsaurus.com> >To: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com >Subject: Re: [MPLS-OPS]: Addressing PE/ CE Links - 2547 >Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 13:36:43 -0600 > >On Thu, May 19, 2005 at 03:26:33PM +0100, MPLS Buchaill wrote: > > 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? > >We use address space out of our own registered blocks -- to ensure that >we don't have any address space clashes. > We do the same . brgds >------- >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/ _________________________________________________________________ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ ------- The MPLS-OPS Mailing List Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml ------- The MPLS-OPS Mailing List Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
|
|