Building an MPLS Network on top of L2VPN

Hi,
I was wondering, is it possible to build an MPLS network on top of L2VPNs? To be more specific, Imagine that a Service provider X can offer you point-to-point or point to multipoint Ethernet L2VPNs. You might want to take advandage of this in order to build your own MPLS network transparently (without the need to do carrier-to-carrier).
Is this senario possible?

Pavlos,
I personally haven't seen anybody implementing MPLS over a L2VPN service but it is possible in principle to do so.
The issue I see is exactly the same as if you used regular Ethernet interfaces to implement MPLS, in which case you need to make sure that baby giant frames (slightly larger than 1500 bytes) are supported to handle the MPLS overhead.
This would have to be worked out with the L2VPN SP.
Let me know if I answered your question,

Similar Messages

  • 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

  • Why CEF needed in MPLS Network??

    I have read the MPLS Fundamentals book by Luc De Ghein, So I understand from the from book that cef needs to enabled in edge routers to tag or untag labels (for Ip packets). I am eager to know why Mpls (Not a cisco proprietary) depends on a cisco proprietary CEF?? If I use Non-Cisco routers in the mpls edge how come the labels get tagged for ip packets??
    <<<<<<<<<Taken from Book>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    MPLS Fundamentals - Luc De Ghein
    Why Is CEF Needed in MPLS Networks?
    Concerning MPLS, CEF is special for a certain reason; otherwise, this book would not explicitly
    cover it. Labeled packets that enter the router are switched according to the label forwarding
    information base (LFIB) on the router. IP packets that enter the router are switched according to
    the CEF table on the router. Regardless of whether the packet is switched according to the LFIB
    or the CEF table, the outgoing packet can be a labeled packet or an IP packet
    <<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

    Hello Bava,
    the key point is that LDP or RSVP TE are able to generate distribute labels for FECs but they do not create the FECs from stratch.
    FEC = Forwarding Equivalent Class
    a destination IP subnet is a typical FEC.
    cisco MPLS code takes advantage of the work done by CEF and uses as input data the FIB (Forwarding Information Base) mantained by CEF, to build the LFIB that is the table where for each FEC there is an association with a label taken from the local node label space.
    The work done by CEF is not so different from what is needed by MPLS: the biggest difference is that the CEF table is kept local and not exported to any other device. MPLS FEC/label bindings are advertised.
    In MPLS frame mode the labels are distributed in unsolicited downstream mode.
    Unsolicited means that the label/FEC association is buiilt based on the topology FIB instead  of waiting for some device to ask a label for the FEC.
    downstream means the labels are sent in the opposite direction of that used by traffic.
    Other attributes are:
    indipendent : means each LSR is free to create its own FEC/label association before receiving the label from the edge LSR that owns the prefix or from a device that is nerarest to the IP subnet (upstream)
    liberal retention: the device will keep note of labels advertised by neighbors even if they are currently not on the best path. This can be seen in the output of show mpls ldp binding and allows for faster recover in case of failure of the best path.
    The unsolicited and liberal retention in standard frame mode comes from the relatively big label space (roughly one milllion labels)
    This was not possible in MPLS cell mode where the label space was small. So MPLS cell mode used on demand downstream label binding and no retention.
    Also MPLS allows for label stacking = use of multiple levels of MPLS Label for services like L3 VPNs
    to be noted other implementations are different in some aspects and each vendor has its internal tecnique to build a table of FECs to be used as starting point for MPLS code.
    For example indipendent label/FEC mapping has its own drawbacks it may be better to wait for a label to be received from a device upstream = nearest to the IP prefix in order to ensure the path is end to end.
    Hope to help
    Giuseppe

  • In our enterprise MPLS network we are using 192.168.20.0/24 subnet, in this subnet we have not assigned the IP 192.168.20.200/30 & 204/30, But still these subnets are reachable . Are these NNI IP ...Please explain.

    In our enterprise MPLS network we are using 192.168.20.0/24 subnet, in this subnet we have not assigned the IP 192.168.20.200/30 & 204/30, But still these subnets are reachable . Are these NNI IP ...Please explain.

    I have checked with ISP, there response is like below:
    Those are the NNI to GBNET IPs for Dominican Republic. They are Network IPs. You should be able to ping them-that means they are working.
    WANRT01#show  ip route | include 192.168.20.20
    B        192.168.20.200/30 [20/0] via 192.168.20.226, 02:18:29
    B        192.168.20.204/30 [20/0] via 192.168.20.226, 02:18:29
    Here its shows from any of our MPLS site we are able to trace the IP and it seems like, 192.168.20.204/30 is one more site but in actual its not.
    INMUMWANRT01#ping 192.168.20.205
    Type escape sequence to abort.
    Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 192.168.20.205, timeout is 2 seconds:
    Success rate is 100 percent (5/5), round-trip min/avg/max = 224/232/260 ms
    INMUMWANRT01#trace              
    INMUMWANRT01#traceroute 192.168.20.205
    Type escape sequence to abort.
    Tracing the route to 192.168.20.205
    VRF info: (vrf in name/id, vrf out name/id)
      1 192.168.20.226 24 msec 24 msec 24 msec
      2 192.168.20.206 [AS 8035] 232 msec 232 msec 252 msec
      3 192.168.20.205 [AS 8035] 224 msec 224 msec *

  • Path Selection for Routes Across MPLS Network

    Customer hub site has two CE routers with two links connected to two seperate PE routers in the Carrier's MPLS network. At the customer's remote site one CE router on a single link is connected to PE router in MPLS network.
    How can I configure the CE routers at the hub site to advertised the same network across the MPLS network to the CE router at the remote site? Also, how can I configure the CE router at the remote site to select on of the router as the primary and the other as secondary? Can I use local-preference on the CE router at the remote site to selected on path over the other.
    I'm not sure if this makes any sense. Any help will be appreciated. Thanks

    Even with multiple RDs for VRFs belonging to the same VPN, you still need IBGP multipath, correct? Multiple RDs is just to get around the RR restriction.
    Also, you posted this message a while back:
    "If you have many VPN customers all using the same addresses (most likely rfc1918), the fact that they have different RDs and that the PE prepends the RD to the prefixes exchanged between PEs will make the same prefixes different in the MPLS VPN core
    cust1 advertises 192.168.1.0/24 with RD 1:1 therefore
    VPNv4 prefix is 1:1:192.168.1.0
    cust2 advertises 192.168.1.0/24 with RD 1:2 therefore
    VPNv4 prefix is 1:2:192.168.1.0"
    My test lab does not support the IBGP multipath command, and thus even with different RDs, it still only installs one best path.
    I understand that RD = make unique VPNv4 routes in SP space, and that RT = what to import into the VRF. However, I am having a hard time visualizing the scenario with mutiple RDs for the same VPN for load balancing purposes. I am trying to understand the logic behind it.
    Per your example, if both 1:1 and 1:2 are received by the remote PE, assuming IBGP multipath is enabled, why would the remote PE load balance between the two links? Why would it assume that the hub subnets are reachable via two different PEs, and that it's not two different, isolated VPNs altogether?
    Is it b/c you imported both 1:1 and 1:2 into a VRF at the remote PE?

  • Establishing Airport network on top of existing router

    I'm trying to add my AEBS and Time Capsule in an extended network on top of an existing network consisting of a Linksys router connecting to the modem. I can connect the AEBS to an ethernet port of the Linksys and it works fine in "bridge" mode. However, when I try to get the TC to extend the signal from the AEBS I get the message "this network can't be extended". I have enabled "let this network be extended" on the AEBS. I think it must have something to do with which router is issuing DHCP addresses. Any ideas? What is bridge mode and is there a better option for this setup?

    If the AEBS is the device connected to the Linksys router, the AEBS must be set to "bridge mode"
    AirPort Utility > Manual Setup > Internet icon > Connection Sharing = "Off (Bridge Mode).
    Then click the Wireless tab and make sure that you have the Wireless Mode for the AEBS set to "Create a wireless network" and there must be a check mark next to "Allow this network to the extended"
    On the TC, click the Wireless tab. Wireless Mode..set to Extend a wireless network"
    Wireless network name, security and password must exactly match the network that the AEBS is creating.
    Post back if you need more details, but these are the key elements.

  • L3 mpls network with out P router, all PE to PE plus daisy chainging

    Guys, is it possible to run a core l3 MPLS network over 7600s and 3800s with out any P routers? The reason i aak is because of the particular situation where we will have to daisy chain PE routers due to lack of fiber.
    any thoughts?

    As martin says absolutley limited problems with this it will work a charm UNTIL yo urun into scaling issues. You are daisy chaining all the PEs which would also suggest to me that you are daisy chaining your RRs. In an mpls network the RR's have enough state to handle to keep them busy enough without also having to deal with passing labels about the network. Also you will have any cisco account team breaking down your door putting the fear of god into you for not having at least 2 P routers ;-). So yes you can indeed run it like you say but the lifetime of your network will be very limited indeed. If your not an SP then dont be concerned - unless you are an enterprise with 10000000s routes then id start to worry. Oh they (cisco) also state that PEs also have enough to do in their life without passing labelled packets about the place. sit and think about what your poor PE is having to do daily it could be 100 vrfs routing tables, which in turn means layer 3 lookups to find out where the packet has to go, qos, multicast, bgp, ospf, rip, eigrp, your own internal IGP, TE tunnels, RSVP - this poor router has enough to do without also adding transit traffic. ;-)

  • Equivalent for an "IP accounting" in MPLS Network

    Do we have an equivalent for an IP accounting in an interface in MPLS network. I would like to know this to identify traffic flowing across a WAN interface which is being tag/label switched

    Thanks gopal. However this command "show tag-switching forwarding table" did not help me find a host in a network choking up the WAN link. I heard from one of the cisco reps saying cisco is releasing an IOS to do this in Feb. I hope that helps.

  • VOIP MPLS network only 40-50% utilized

    We are in the process of upgrading our bandwidth at our branch locations into 3 Mbps MPLS networ and we only run Citrix traffic and IP Voice (Interoffice calls) from our Branch locations into our HQ.
    We expect Bandwith utilization to typically max out at 1.6 MBPS. Do you think we need to configure QoS for the voice traffic since the circuit will only be 40-50 percent utilized? My thinking was why should I configure QoS if the bandwidth is only at 40 - 50 percent. The voice traffic should have enough bandwidth to communicate over the wire.
    Is my thinking correct or should I configure QoS across this MPLS network? If I should confiure QoS what type do you recommend.
    Any responses are greatly appreciated

    Hi,
    I would configure QoS, because there are not only sunny days in life ...
    What if you catch Nimda version 7.2beta, i.e. the newest worm out there trying to blast any valid IP in your network? I would not want to explain to my CEO why we lost telephony as well ...
    So on a more technical level: QoS is needed to do resource management. As such you are right in that QoS is not needed if you have enough resources. Yet, who can guarantee this in an IP network at any point in time? I would put it QoS just as an insurance though it would not be needed during normal operation.
    Saying this I might add that this is the appropriate usage anyhow, as QoS will not solve issues arising from constant lack of bandwidth. Queueing is meant to handle exceptions. There is always the possibility of the unforseen.
    Hope this helps! Please rate all posts.
    Regards, Martin

  • Running Large Backups over an MPLS Network

    We are opening up a second data center at my organization. The location is about 60 miles from our primary data center.
    At our primary data center we use an MPLS network for our WAN. We have ll remote locations on our WAN and we have a DS-3 that connects to our primary data center.
    At our new second data center we will connect it to the MPLS network.
    Do you think we should run our backups between the 2 data centers across the MPLS or do you think we should order a seperate private line or ethernet type service between the 2 data centers? All back ups from our primary data center will continually move across the network to our new secondary data center.
    Do you think MPLS is a good technology to run large back ups across? Is it reliable enough

    "Do you think MPLS is a good technology to run large back ups across?"
    Sure.
    "Is it reliable enough"
    Depends more on your MPLS provider than the technology itself.
    Two issues that may be more important to you vs. how "reliable" MPLS is, might be cost of bandwidth vs. other technologies or sharing the MPLS bandwidth with non-backup applications. The latter would depend much on what QoS that might be available to you to insure your backup traffic doesn't adversely impact non-backup traffic.

  • MPLS network design challenge

    Hi,
    I have a design issue for which I really like your help.
    In a MPLS network there are twoPOP gateway routers (G1,G2) peering with various MPLS VPN Service providers via B2B vrf eBGP peering are in 4 different ASN's. They inturn all peer via VPNv4 eBGP with the Core ASN which comprises of  2 Nos VPNv4 RR's and every site in the ASN haveing 2 P/PE per site. Every P/PE is peering via VPNv4- iBGP with the VPNv4 RR's. The RR's are not in the forwarding path of the traffic.
    Every site has 2 Nos CE routers and each CE router does a vrf based ebgp peering with the P/PE's.
    The P/PE routers import 2Nos RT exported by the 2 Nos POP G/w routers and inturn selects the best path and pass it to the CE routers.
    Now it is seen that the P/PE of all sites is selecting the best path adverstised by G1 instead of  G2 based on the AS PATH length and the shortest path is being adverstised by G1. So till a situation arises that the G1 is down till that time the P/PE's are forwarding the outbound traffic from the CE to G1 even also when the IGP cost is adding up high and when there is a direct link failure from the P/PE site to G1 site.
    It therefore makes sense that if the direct physical link form a P/PE site to the site G1 is located goes down ,the P/PE's then should choose  G2 via another path even when G1 is available.
    Does these sort of requirements ever come in SP environments from customers ? if so what are the solutions ..
    Thanks in advance
    Kas

    Hi kas,
    This type of requirement come to providers and there are few options which provider can implement.
    1- Play with local preference along with import map in vrf if requirement is customer specific. I mean if one customer want that G1 should be primary exit point and other customer want G2 as primary exit than he can use import map (which is similar to route-map )
    ip vrf ABCD
    rd XX
    import map ABCD
    route-target export XX
    route-target import YY
    route-map ABCD permit 20
    set local-preference >100
    2- Or you can play with As-path prepending option if you want to skip selection based on local preference.
    it is in provider interest to provide you solution. as there are options of affecting traffic by using communities.
    Please provide diagram and some config for complete solution.
    Regards
    Mahesh

  • MPLS Network Backup

    We have a MPLS network between Head office & varios branch office located across the globe. Can you suggest me the best possible backup(automatic) for this MPLS? as we are facing lot of breaks/cuts in the MPLS Network.

    This is to give a fair idea.
    Pls modify the conifg to suit your setup.
    router ospf x
    router-id x.x.x.x
    network 192.168.1.0 0.0.0.255 area 1
    network 192.168.2.0 0.0.0.255 area 1
    network 192.168.3.0 0.0.0.255 area 1
    Assumption that you have Area 0 at your MPLS CE for upwards and other VPN router upwards.
    interface fa1/0
    Description Connection ot MPLS CE
    ip add 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
    ip ospf cost 10
    interface fa1/1
    Description Connection to Backup VPN CE
    ip add 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
    ip ospf cost 100
    interface vlan 10
    Description Connection to Servers Subnet
    ip add 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
    HTH-Cheers,
    Swaroop

  • Connectivity problems on ATM MPLS network

    We have implemented a country wide MPLS network based on 8500 platforms. We have encountered some strange connectivity problems between some PE's. Without apparent reason connectivity is lost between some PEs and restored after some time. The global routing table is perfectly stable among all the routers on the path between respective PE's. Also the LVC's & TAGs are stable and practically we were unable to find any change between the working and not working state. As a curious thing, during the outage (minutes) clearing routes into a PE VRF was restoring connectivity on the respective VRF and all other VRFs on the respective PE also!
    Has enyone seeing similar problems before?
    PE routers are 3660 series and we've tried all IOS available on CCO.

    Have you made any provisioning (upgrading connectivity) bet the PEs and Ps....I suffer such a similar problem with our network PEs and I notice that this happen after provisioning links between our PEs (RPMs in MGX 8850) and the ATM LSR (BPX 8600).
    when i issue "clear ip route vrf *" or reload the RPM.....all the VRFs operate normally again.....so I get used to such a problem after any network provisioning process but still i couldn't relate this to problems with VRFs.

  • Influencing BGP attributes within MPLS network

    pls take a look at my question and diagram is attached in the file. pls help me to fix this problem.
    I have following requirement about traffic paths within the 
    MPLS network.MPLS network is running MP-BGP4.
    1.Traffic from Europe branch to Asia branch go through London
      router.
    2.Traffic from America branch to Asia branch go through Los Angeles
      router.
    3.The two paths through London and Los Angeles should have redundancy.
      That is if path through London is not accessible all the traffic must
      go through Los Angeles. IF Los Angeles path go down all the traffic must
      go through London.
    4.Traffic from Asia to Europe and America is controlled by redistributing
      BGP4 learned routes with different metrics at the London and Los Angeles
      routers.So that trafic from Asia branch to Europe go through London and
      traffic from Asia to America go through Los Angeles.
    I have been using below configs on the PE routers. But it is not working.
    In the MPLS network only one path is selected for both traffic from Europe
    and America.Pls can anyone help me to fix this problem.
    #PE3
    ip vrf CUSTOMER
    rd 1:10
    route-target export 1:20
    route-target import 1:40
    export map EXPORT-ROUTE
    import map IMPORT-ROUTE
    interface FastEthernet0/0
    description LONDON-GW
    ip vrf forwarding CUSTOMER
    ip address 1.1.1.2 255.255.255.252
    router bgp 65400
    address-family ipv4 vrf CUSTOMER
    redistribute connected
    neighbor 1.1.1.1 remote-as 65401
    neighbor 1.1.1.1 activate
    neighbor 1.1.1.1 next-hop-self
    neighbor 1.1.1.1 soft-reconfiguration inbound
    no auto-summary
    no synchronization
    exit-address-family
    ip extcommunity-list 1 permit rt 1:10
    ip extcommunity-list 2 permit rt 1:40
    route-map EXPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description LONDON-GW
    match extcommunity 1
    set extcomm-list 1 delete
    set extcommunity rt 1:20 additive
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description EU & US-BRANCH
    match extcommunity 2
    #PE4
    ip vrf CUSTOMER
    rd 1:10
    route-target export 1:30
    route-target import 1:40
    export map EXPORT-ROUTE
    import map IMPORT-ROUTE
    interface FastEthernet0/0
    description LA-GW
    ip vrf forwarding CUSTOMER
    ip address 2.2.2.2 255.255.255.252
    router bgp 65400
    address-family ipv4 vrf CUSTOMER
    redistribute connected
    neighbor 2.2.2.1 remote-as 65402
    neighbor 2.2.2.1 activate
    neighbor 2.2.2.1 next-hop-self
    neighbor 2.2.2.1 soft-reconfiguration inbound
    no auto-summary
    no synchronization
    exit-address-family
    ip extcommunity-list 1 permit rt 1:10
    ip extcommunity-list 2 permit rt 1:40
    route-map EXPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description LA-GW
    match extcommunity 1
    set extcomm-list 1 delete
    set extcommunity rt 1:30 additive
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description EU & US-BRANCH
    match extcommunity 2
    #PE1
    ip vrf CUSTOMER
    rd 1:10
    route-target export 1:40
    route-target import 1:20
    route-target import 1:30
    export map EXPORT-ROUTE
    import map IMPORT-ROUTE
    interface FastEthernet0/0
    description EU-BRANCH
    ip vrf forwarding CUSTOMER
    ip address 3.3.3.2 255.255.255.252
    router bgp 65400
    address-family ipv4 vrf CUSTOMER
    redistribute connected
    redistribute static
    no auto-summary
    no synchronization
    exit-address-family
    ip route vrf CUSTOMER 172.16.1.0 255.255.255.0 FastEthernet0/0 3.3.3.1 name EU-BRANCH
    ip extcommunity-list 1 permit rt 1:10
    ip extcommunity-list 2 permit rt 1:20
    ip extcommunity-list 3 permit rt 1:30
    route-map EXPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description EU-BRANCH
    match extcommunity 1
    set extcomm-list 1 delete
    set extcommunity rt 1:40 additive
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description LONDON-GW(MAIN)
    match extcommunity 2
    set metric 100
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 20
    description LA-GW(BACKUP)
    match extcommunity 3
    set metric 200
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 30
    description OTHER
    #PE2
    ip vrf CUSTOMER
    rd 1:10
    route-target export 1:40
    route-target import 1:20
    route-target import 1:30
    export map EXPORT-ROUTE
    import map IMPORT-ROUTE
    interface FastEthernet0/0
    description US-BRANCH
    ip vrf forwarding CUSTOMER
    ip address 4.4.4.2 255.255.255.252
    router bgp 65400
    address-family ipv4 vrf CUSTOMER
    redistribute connected
    redistribute static
    no auto-summary
    no synchronization
    exit-address-family
    ip route vrf CUSTOMER 192.168.1.0 255.255.255.0 FastEthernet0/0 4.4.4.1 name US-BRANCH
    ip extcommunity-list 1 permit rt 1:10
    ip extcommunity-list 2 permit rt 1:20
    ip extcommunity-list 3 permit rt 1:30
    route-map EXPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description US-BRANCH
    match extcommunity 1
    set extcomm-list 1 delete
    set extcommunity rt 1:40 additive
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 10
    description LONDON-GW(BACKUP)
    match extcommunity 2
    set metric 200
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 20
    description LA-GW(MAIN)
    match extcommunity 3
    set metric 100
    route-map IMPORT-ROUTE permit 30
    description OTHER

    Hi Manoj
    "send-community both" will export both Standard and Extended Communities
    The Standard Community Values which we are setting up New on PE3 and PE4 and Matching on PE1 and PE2 can be anything in ASN:nn Format..I Just randomly chose them as 65400:1111 on PE3/PE1 and 65400:2222 on PE4/PE2.
    The extcommunity values to be used on PE3/PE4 will be the export RT values used in the VRF Customer Config as posted in your first post..
    #PE3
    ip vrf CUSTOMER
    rd 1:10
    route-target export 1:20
    route-target import 1:40
    export map EXPORT-ROUTE
    import map IMPORT-ROUTE
    #PE4
    ip vrf CUSTOMER
    rd 1:10
    route-target export 1:30
    route-target import 1:40
    export map EXPORT-ROUTE
    import map IMPORT-ROUTE
    I think I mixed up little with PE3 as PE1 and PE4 as PE2 instead ..Revised corrected config would be
    On PE3-- Under VPNv4 We enable sending out the normal community values out to the RR.Then we match the extcommunity rt for the VRF Customer and set the community value to 65400:1111 which will be matched at PE1
    router bgp 65400
    address-family vpnv4
    neighbor "RR-IP" send-community both
    neighbor "RR-IP" route-map community out
    exit-address-family
    route-map community permit 10
    match extcommunity CUSTOMER
    set community 65400:1111
    route-map community permit 20
    ip extcommunity-list standard CUSTOMER permit rt 1:20
    On PE4-- Under VPNv4 We enable sending out the normal community values out to the RR.Then we match the extcommunity rt for the VRF Customer and set the community value to 65400:2222 which will be matched at PE2
    router bgp 65400
    address-family vpnv4
    neighbor "RR-IP" send-community both
    neighbor "RR-IP" route-map community out
    exit-address-family
    route-map community permit 10
    match extcommunity CUSTOMER
    set community 65400:2222
    route-map community permit 20
    ip extcommunity-list standard CUSTOMER permit rt 1:30
    On PE1-- Under VPNv4 We match the community value 65400:1111 which was set at PE3 and set the LP to 110
    router bgp 65400
    address-family vpnv4
    neighbor "RR-IP" route-map community in
    exit-address-family
    route-map community permit 10
    match community CUSTOMER
    set local-preference 110
    route-map community permit 20
    ip community-list standard CUSTOMER permit 65400:1111
    On PE2-- Under VPNv4 We match the community value 65400:2222 which was set at PE4 and set the LP to 110
    router bgp 65400
    address-family vpnv4
    neighbor "RR-IP" route-map community in
    exit-address-family
    route-map community permit 10
    match community CUSTOMER
    set local-preference 110
    route-map community permit 20
    ip community-list standard CUSTOMER permit 65400:2222
    Make Sure that RR is enabled to propogate the normal BGP communities as well...
    Hope this helps to answer your question..Please let me know for any clarifications..
    Regards
    Varma

  • Any suggestions for building a home network (in a modest...

    Any suggestions for building a home network (in a modest 1600 sq. ft. home) with the following requirements...
    1) Laptop(s) and PC share broadband (cable) internet connection
    2) Access files on PC from laptop(s) and vice versa
    3) PC and laptop(s) share printer (Canon Pixma 610)
    4) Send media on PC to TV
    5) Send music to wireless speakers (not purchased yet)
    Note hardware specs:
    A) One laptop runs on Windows XP and has an Intel PRO wireless 2915ABG network connection
    B) PC runs Windows XP Media Center
    I was thinking about the wireless N broadband router 300.  From the experiences of the community, will I be able to achieve my goal?  Beside a PC adapter, is there any other hardware I will need?
    A couple other questions.
    The router will likely be sitting right next to my PC.  Does the PC need to have a wireless adapter or can it be wired from the router to the PC?
    When will the media extender be available?  Will it work with Windows XP?
    Thank you.
    Chris

    I personally might not buy Wireless-N, but the idea of being on the bleeding edge is nice.
    Anyway, whichever router you choose, you should be able to accomplish almost everything you need.
    You'll be able to share your internet amongst all of the computers, and share files between them all. Local firewalls and permission settings on individual computers could potentially pose a problem.
    Sending media to your TV may or may not be possible, depending on what other hardware you have. A router itself would not be able to do that, as a TV doesn't usually have any form of WiFi, but if you had a box connected to it for displaying content on the TV, you could do something like that...
    Wireless speakers are generally a separate wireless system. As far as I know, there is a wireless transmitter that sits next to the amp (or other sound source), and broadcasts the music wirelessly to the speakers. You'd have to make sure the speakers and wireless router are on different channels as to not cause interference.
    Don't know much about the media extender, but highly likely will be compatible with XP.

Maybe you are looking for