6500's or ASR's for MPLS

In our enterprise a project is driving more bandwidth usage and is making us consider deploy
of MPLS on proposed core gig e WAN links that would link South England and Scottish datacentres
We are considering upgrading existing North and South sited core 6500's to terminate these
new MPLS links. Or alternatively purchase new north and south ASR platforms as termination.
Are there any 6500-platform-specific MPLS dependencies/restrictions
to consider that would not be encountered if we used ASR's ??
thnks
martyn

existing 65's are 6509's with sup720-3B's but 'could' be upgraded if neeed. ASR model that could be used is to be decided.
Horsepower on the device to be used can be brought with money, which can be be got if necessary. What i'm after is a high level expert finger in the air compare on the MPLS implementations on 6500's and ASR's , to the aim of IF i deploy on multi purposes 65's might i have obscure issues pop up down the road, as opposed to a 'proper' ASR edge router MPLS
implementation.
thnks
rgds

Similar Messages

Pls tell me usefull URLs for MPLS VPN different scenario .....

pls tell me usefull URLs for MPLS VPN different scenarios. presently i am doing research on this topic so pls tell me useful URLs so that i can get help.

Here's a good start: http://www.cisco.com/go/mpls
Hope that helps - pls rate the post if it does.
Paresh

3640 IOS for MPLS

Can anyone advise about 3640 IOS version using for MPLS.I have 3640 router with 16 flash and 64 memory and I need to run MPLS with all LDP features.Which IOS I can use.

To run MPLS LDP and couple of more MPLS and VPN features only feature set available with 64/16 Dram/Flash for a 3640 is 12.3 with Telco Feature Set.
HTH-Cheers,
Swaroop

IOS for 2801 having support for MPLS

Assalam o Alaikum,
Is there any IOS for 2801 router which has the support for MPLS?

Alaikum Al Salam,
Please use Cisco Feature Navigator to find information about Cisco IOS software images and the supported features for your platform(s) :
http://tools.cisco.com/ITDIT/CFN/jsp/index.jsp
Search by feature and choose MPLS, and then choose Cisco 2801 as the platform, you'll get a list of the IOSs that support MPLS on your platform, and please always check the required DRAM and Flash.
BR,
Mohammed Mahmoud.

Understanding OSPF For MPLS Superbackbone.

LSA1 is Router LSA And LSA2 is Network LSA.What is the difference between them?In which direction are they propogated?I need to understand it neatly as I am studying it for MPLS Superbackbone .

In short, the router LSA is generated by all routers and describe all the connected interfaces on that router.
The network LSA is generated by the Designated Router (DR) only and describe all the routers connected to the broadcast or NBMA network for which this router is the DR.
If you need more information on what the LSA are for and the details of OSPF in general, I would recommend you read RFC2328.
Here's the link for it:
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2328.txt?number=2328
Hope this helps,

Looking for MPLS Guru

Folks,
I need some real world advice on choosing the right hardware for MPLS backbone. Presently we have 7600's, 7500's and 7200 vxr's and we want to build a MPLS backbone. My question is that is it advisable to choose 7500 and 7600(sup 720) as the core of the MPLS backbone and the 7200 stays at the edge.
My understanding is that 7500 has been end of lifed and the 7600 is more of an edge router that does not support advanced features of MPLS. Could I use any of these routers at the edge and use 7200 vxr's at the core???
Any thoughts would be highly appreciated.

Being the geek that I am, I would say 7600s with Sup-720 3BXLs. When you are trying to choose an edge router, look at how many terminations, types of terminations, amount of traffic and peers, etc. If you are going to do heavy optical terminations, or a large number of peers (transit and Internet) I would use the 7600s. If you just need a stepping stone, the 7206VXR is a good router with the NPE-G1 engine. Also, the NPE-G2 engine is supposed to be released soon. This essentially doubles what the G1 can do. Hope this helps.

In reviewing the Cisco Licensing Guide, there is a license part number for MPLS on the Nexus 7010. Part Number is N7K-MPLS1K9.

In reviewing the Cisco Licensing Guide, there is a license part number for MPLS on the Nexus 7010. Part Number is N7K-MPLS1K9. Is there a corresponding part number for the Nexus 7710?

For the benefit of others, here is what we found. The N7K was hitting the bug CSCtg95381.
Symptom
Nexus 7000 may punt traffic to CPU; so that the traffic may experience random delay or drop.
Further looking, ARP is learned and FIB adjacency is in FIB adjacency table.
Conditions
The problem is caused by race condition. Some hosts have not responded to the ARP refresh sent by
N7k which in turn trigger to delete ARP entry due to expiry. As a result the route delete notification is
sent to URIB from the process. However there is still traffic coming to given IP address as a result the next packet that hit glean resulting in triggering ARP and hope ARP is learnt from the host this time.
Workaround
(s):
Clear ip route < host>.
Not totally explains why it was working for certain client-server combination but yet the workaround is holding well for end-points when implemented.
There would be no host route for the destination server in the adjacency manager on N7K-01. The only thing thats there is the subnet route pointing towards the vlan gateway address. Implementing the work-around, a new /32 route can now be seen in the adjacency manager for the server.
The bug is fixed in releases starting 5.1(5). Planning to upgrade to 5.2(3a).
Regards, Rashid.

6500 TCAM usage for MPLS

Hello!
I'm using cat6500 WS-SUP720-3BXL as BGP router for 3 full view upstream an several clients. Different clients want to use different upstream for output traffic, but output should be redundant . So I should implement VRF + BGP.
I have done the following config:
=-=-=-=-=-=
ip vrf Upsream1
rd Y:Z
     import map Bacup1-rmap
route-target export Y:Z
route-target import N:M
ip vrf Upsream2
rd N:M
import map Bacup2-rmap
route-target import Y:Z
route-target export N:M
router bgp XXX
address-family ipv4 vrf Upsream1
neighbor Y.Y.Y.Y remote-as ZZZ
neighbor description GoodUplink
address-family ipv4 vrf Upsream2
neighbor N.N.N.N remote-as MMM
neighbor description BadUplink
=-=-=-=-=-=
after loading full view in to table I get error
MLSCEF-SP-7-FIB_EXCEPTION: FIB TCAM exception, Some entries will be
software switched
#show platform hardware capacity forwarding
L3 Forwarding Resources
FIB TCAM usage:                     Total        Used       %Used
72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM)     1032192      1002192         95%
144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6)        8192           8          1%
detail:      Protocol                    Used       %Used
IPv4                      600035         64%
MPLS                       32992          31%
=-=-=-=-=-=
Command
#show mpls forwarding-table
show all routes with label.
=-=-=-=-=-=
Question: is can I some how use VRF+BGP but disable TCAM MPLS table usage, and label generation for my platform?
Cisco say
Ipv4 routes ---1 TCAM entry
ipv4 routes(vpn/vrf) -- 1 TCAM entry
ipv4 multicast -- 2 TCAM entry
ipv6 (anycast/unicast) -- 2 TCAM entry
MPLS labels -- 1 TCAM entry
But look like BGP+VRF =2 TCAM entry.
Is there any workaround to use 1 TCAM entry for one route in VRF from BGP for 6500?
Thank you for answer!

Hello! thanks for the tips. I found on the same forum an interesting solution of the problem.
MPLS VPN—Per VRF Label
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/mpls/configuration/guide/mp_vpn_per_vrf_lbl.html
With this tecnology ony one mpls lable used by one VRF:
But it requires inclusion of beta-future in the network core.
Who can tell how stable this feature and whether it will be realised?
Today I decided to use two technologies that have already passed the test of time.
The first
BGP Support for IP Prefix Import from Global Table into a VRF Table
No MPLS LABEL for route from Global.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2s/feature/guide/fs_bgivt.html
Multi-VRF Selection Using Policy Based Routing (PBR)
And http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_2sr/12_2srb/feature/guide/srb2mvrf.html
Sergiy A. Pyvovaroff

6500 or 7600 for MPLS ?

Hi,
as I look to the characteristics of these 2 products they are quite similar if using supervisor engine 720. They both share several modules, interfaces...
The main requirement for us is to have full MPLS functionalities. Do you (experts) have a preference according to your appreciated experience ?
Regards.
Yannick.

hi
i think contrast to pfc3b and pfc3bxl is volume of memory,pfc3bxl has 1G memory. if you need more vpn you need more memories.
i have once installed pfc3a for customer mpls vpn. i config 7609 with pfc3a for PE function, and config 3 7609 with pfc3a and 10720 to compose a dpt ring,. i found L3 mpls vpn work well. but found a problem , after we config more than 300 interface vlan and 100 physical interface, the cpu on 7609 reach 80% after we telnet into 7609 router.
really we can config mpls vpn PE on pfc3a , but someone told me there were some bugs which cisco can't resolve on pfc3a( i don't know). on cisco cco, pfc3a didn't support mpls vpn pe offically.
i think you may ask cisco se for help.

DFC3 's for MPLS ?

I'm looking for some advice on running MPLS on the 6500 platform. I've got several 6500's with Sup 720 (PFC 3A) which I am looking to upgrade to PFC 3Bs to support MPLS. However, I'm wondering if I should upgrade the modules to DFC3's to support MPLS. I imagine that the answer might be "it depends", but thought I would reach out for advice.
Anyone have recommendations or links that might help with this decision?
Thanks,
Jim

Hello, what line card do you have? DFC is installed in the Line card and you need to check frist. DFC will handle the traffic locally, this is the big benefit that you will have. The Mpps also will increase from 30 to 48.
Best regards,
Cassio

Check for MPL status

Hi. Is there an easy way to check if MPL is currently up or down? Is there a table in the database that can tell this status?
We have a file upload process that are automatically picked up by MPL and loaded in staging tables.
Thank you.

I am looking for this information as well, and spl.sh -m isup doesn't work. At least not on Red Hat Linux. This is the output I see here:
*$ spl.sh -m isup*
*111026.11:24:12 <info> Startup/Shutdown logs will go to /spl/CCB231DEV/logs/system/spl.sh.log*
*$*
And the log basically parrots that same info. Any idea on a way to check in this case? I want to be notified if the service drops for any reason, and either attempt to restart it automatically or manually.

IOS VERSION FOR MPLS

Hi! i'm trying to do a lab at my university implementing MPLS. I have routers cisco 2610 series. This is my configuration:
Cisco2600-2(config-if)# ip route-cache cef
Cisco2600-2(config-if)# mpls label protocol ldp
Cisco2600-2(config-if)#mpls ip
My problem is that i can't use te "set mpls experimental topmost " command at the policy-map. My options are:
Cisco2600-2(config-pmap-c)#?
QoS policy-map class configuration commands:
bandwidth Bandwidth
compression Activate Compression
drop Drop all packets
exit Exit from QoS class action configuration mode
no Negate or set default values of a command
police Police
priority Strict Scheduling Priority for this Class
queue-limit Queue Max Threshold for Tail Drop
random-detect Enable Random Early Detection as drop policy
service-policy Configure QoS Service Policy
shape Traffic Shaping
My version of the IOS is:
IOS (tm) C2600 Software (C2600-TELCO-M), Version 12.3(15b), RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
wich version do i need to run this command and configurations?? Any information will help. Thank you very much. Best regards!!

It is my understanding that you don't have that capability in those images (or platform). I didn't find the feature in the feature set of the 2600 platform. The feature you are looking for is: "MPLS Quality of Service (QoS) Enhancements"
From the feature set definition:
- MPLS quality of service enhancements allow service providers to classify packets according to their type, input interface, and other factors by setting (marking) each packet within the MPLS experimental field without changing the IP precedence/DSCP field. For example, service providers can classify packets with or without considering the rate of the packets that PE1 receives. If the rate is a consideration, the service provider marks in-rate packets differently from out-of-rate packets.
HTH,
-W

7600 as Backbone router for MPLS core

I have 7600's and 7500's in my backbone and 7200's on the edge. My question is that when I look at the feature navigator the 7600 with Sup 720 is missing a lot of basic features required to be a core router of an MPLS Backbone. Features like Traffic engineering fast reroute, MPLS enabled Netflow are missing on this platform, is this platform not a good candidate to be a Backbone router for a service provider offering MPLS services??? 7500 on the other hand it seems 7500 seems to have support for the MPLS related features.

Not sure what version you where looking at but...
Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software
IOS (tm) s72033_rp Software (s72033_rp-ADVIPSERVICESK9_WAN-M), Version 12.2(18)SXF, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
Technical Support: http://www.cisco.com/techsupport
Copyright (c) 1986-2005 by cisco Systems, Inc.
Compiled Sat 10-Sep-05 01:18 by ccai
Image text-base: 0x40101040, data-base: 0x42D60000
ROM: System Bootstrap, Version 12.2(17r)S2, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
BOOTLDR: s72033_rp Software (s72033_rp-ADVIPSERVICESK9_WAN-M), Version 12.2(18)SXF, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1)
CASAN_Core1 uptime is 1 week, 4 hours, 9 minutes
Time since CASAN_Core1 switched to active is 1 week, 4 hours, 8 minutes
System returned to ROM by power cycle (SP by power on)
System image file is "disk0:s72033-advipservicesk9_wan-mz.122-18.SXF.bin"
This product contains cryptographic features and is subject to United
States and local country laws governing import, export, transfer and
use. Delivery of Cisco cryptographic products does not imply
third-party authority to import, export, distribute or use encryption.
Importers, exporters, distributors and users are responsible for
compliance with U.S. and local country laws. By using this product you
agree to comply with applicable laws and regulations. If you are unable
to comply with U.S. and local laws, return this product immediately.
A summary of U.S. laws governing Cisco cryptographic products may be found at:
http://www.cisco.com/wwl/export/crypto/tool/stqrg.html
If you require further assistance please contact us by sending email to
[email protected].
cisco CISCO7609 (R7000) processor (revision 1.1) with 983008K/65536K bytes of memory.
Processor board ID FOX092307Q5
SR71000 CPU at 600Mhz, Implementation 0x504, Rev 1.2, 512KB L2 Cache
Last reset from power-on
SuperLAT software (copyright 1990 by Meridian Technology Corp).
X.25 software, Version 3.0.0.
Bridging software.
TN3270 Emulation software.
1 SIP-200 controller .
1 Virtual Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interface
74 Gigabit Ethernet/IEEE 802.3 interfaces
1917K bytes of non-volatile configuration memory.
8192K bytes of packet buffer memory.
65536K bytes of Flash internal SIMM (Sector size 512K).
Configuration register is 0x2102
CASAN_Core1#
CASAN_Core1(config)#mpls traffic-eng ?
auto-bw auto-bw parameters
fast-reroute fast-reroute parameters
link-management Link Management configuration
logging Trap logging configuration
path-selection Path Selection Configuration
reoptimize Reoptimization parameters
signalling Traffic Engineering Signalling Parameters
topology Topology Database Configuration
tunnels Traffic Engineering tunnels

7600 platform for MPLS based L2 and L3 services

Hi,
We are planning to deploy 7600s (testing to be done) for L2 and L3 services. Has anyone out there found some issues with both the layers functioning in unison on the same.
Thanks
Cheers,
~sultan

Hello Charles,
Thanks for you reply, actually I wanted to know more specific details, like IOS and modules being used by others, which you have stated.
I am planning to go for SIP-200 and SIP-400 with STM-1 POS, 2xGIG and FE8 modules.
Services would be EoMPLS, including VPLS and MPLS/BGP IP VPNs.
Thanks
Cheers
~sultan

Routing Protocol recommendation for MPLS Network

I am in the process of building a 14 site MPLS network for voice and data traffic. The vendor installing the network has configured RIPv2 as the routing protocol. I am considering switching this over to EIGRP. Can anyone explain to me why this would be better or should I just stay with RIP.
Thanks

Hi Chip,
Its not very clear whether you are implementing a MPLS network or implementing a Network over MPLS for an end user with 14 sites.
1) If MPLS network then other IGP variants than OSPF and ISIS best avoided. Now if the choice is between ISIS and OSPF then my personal recommendation would be OSPF. And this decision is purely driven by Operational Considerations rather than any technical advantages. Since at the end of the day what matters is how easy it is to implement add delete or troubleshoot the network.
2)If for End User then it would not be right to recommend EIGRP or RIP or OSPF without knowing the current size & topology of each of these 14 sites, as well as the desired expansion plans. But if these 14 sites are the only sites and are all standalone branch sites connecting over MPLS VPN then RIP,EIGRP or OSPF can be implemented as per your and customer comfort.
HTH-Cheers,
Swaroop

6500's or ASR's for MPLS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for