EIGRP and MPLS

Can you run EIGRP as a CE to PE protocol ? Is anybody doing this ? Are there any limitations/problems ?

Hi Hilary,
I think it is supported in 12.0(22)S
Check out this URL:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/relnote/
regards
javed

Similar Messages

IPX and MPLS

I am begining to implement an MPLS network. I have several sites that are using Novell 4.1 servers that are using IPX. At present I am using EIGRP and Frame Relay with some Point to Point connections. When I move all of these sites over to the MPLS network, what am I going to have to do to keep the IPX working between these servers.
Will IPX run on MPLS? Or will MPLS encapsulate the IPX Packet in IP?
Some of these servers cannot be upgraded to the Novell 5.0 or 5.1 using IP.

It's kind of funny the "MP" in MPLS still needs some time. I doubt we will see anything for carrying IPX natively inside MPLS, mainly because the demand isn't there in the service provider space.
There are emerging standards for bridging layer 2 inside MPLS - particularly VPLS. That may be an option, but it's not clear what platforms are supporting it right now as the standard is still in draft.
For the short-term, certainly upgrading to nate IP is most desirable. If that's not feasable, then GRE tunnels will work well with a small number of servers.
(Tunnels are point-to-point = n-squared)

MP-BGP and MPLS

Hello all,
I've been experimenting recently with MP-BGP and MPLS. I have no issues with how it works and how to implement and have a fully working lab however I am wondering whether there is a solution that exists in order to create a full mesh without on every PE router having to specify the IP address of every other PE router in the VPNv4 configuration. So the ideal scenario would be that i could add another site to my MPLS which will receive all routes from every other site without updating any configuration at any other site.
Thanks

Hi Mathew,
You can choose P1 or P2 as RR and configure a single MP-BGP session from PE devices to RR. Any new PE that you want to include will need configuraion changes on RR and the new PE alone. You dont need to add configuration on other exisitng PEs.
You can also play around with bgp dynamic neighbor to further reduce the configuration. But I ahvent used it myself and not sure if VPNv4 is supported.
-Nagendra

EIGRP and BGP

when EIGRP and BGP is flapping.
which portion should I check to find out
if it is flapping because of high traffic or low quality access lines?
which should config should I check?
thanks a lot

Following links may help you
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094613.shtml
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a008009478a.shtml

WCCP-2 and MPLS

Hi
This is a question regarding WCCP-2 and MPLS as well.
I have a customer who has Cisco Catalyst 6500 switches and would also like to run MPLS on the Network. MPLS as such is supported only on the Layer-3 modules. The customer has the GIG OSM modules and ATM modules in the switch. The GIG Modules connect to the Internet and the ATM modules connect to various of the branches. The Content Engines are connected to FastEthernet modules on the 6500 which do not support MPLS.
Now to run WCCP-2 redirection, this would be done on the GIG interfaces with the "ip wccp redirect out" command on that interface in addition to the usual commands for WCCP-2. Now what happens is that the input packets received via the branches are all going to be MPLS tagged. Will these packets be redirected to the CE before they are sent off the output GIG interfaces.
Also the customer require to run IP spoofing with WCCP-2. Will the same thing happen in the opposite direction.
Will this work at all.
Thanks

You described the physical connection, but not logical structure.
1. You did not mentioned does the customer have Layer 3 module installed in Catalyst 6500? Catalyst 6500 without RSM (route switch module) can not make desition on the 3d layer.
All modules that you mentioned are 2d layer modules. Usually, when you have RSM, you create virtual interfaces, where you configure the routing or 3d layer information. Of course, you can configure it directly in the physical interface (you need to allow this fuction, by default, physical interfaces are switched ones).
2. Catalyst 6500 - what role it has in MPLS network (CE, PE, something else)?
3. What you mean under "sent to Internet"? Usually the packets to Internet are sent without MPLS tags. MPLS tags are used inside of MPLS backbone. The customer also receie pure IP-packet without any addtional tags.

Frame Relay and MPLS

Hi,
I want to ask about the frame relay and MPLS.
Frame Relay Scenerio
The frames reached at the frame relay network and forwarded on the basis of DLCI. All the VCs are defined prior to the traffic on the network on the basis of DLCI (This is just like the MPLS network as packets are forwarded on the basis of Labels).
Now my Question is How can MPLS is used in frame relay network or what are its affects in the presence of DLCI (As DLCIs are also performing the same task and also works on layer 2) or these two are different equivalent technologies ?

Hi Muhammad,
The answer is : MPLS is working on FR like it's working on ethernet. Because the FR and Ethernet are running on Layer2. It's told that MPLS is working at layer 2.5 , meaning that is between Layer 3 , and Layer 2. So in order to work it needs a layer2 forwarding in your case FR's DLCI. On top of the Layer 2 it is the MPLS header.
Dan

MTU over DMVPN and MPLS

Hello All,
I have a query regarding MTU over both DMVPN and MPLS.
I have been running the following command from a windows box
ping x.x.x.x -f -l yyy (yyyy being the buffer size) and x.x.x.x being my remote hosts
I am using the same destination host and have two different paths to it. One over MPLS and one over a DMVPN.
I would have expected to be able to send packets with a higher MTU over the MPLS but for both MPLS and DMVPN the maximum packet size I can send with the DF bit set is the same (1372).
Is this normal behaviour? I though MPLS would have less overhead, so my maximum packet size would be higher in my tests

Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
Generally, MPLS supports an increased MTU, when adding MPLS labels, while VPN tunnels, like DMVPN, don't exceed original MTU, and so, it reduces payload space. So, normally, you should see larger ping buffer DF support across MPLS than DMVPN. However, "normal" can be very much impacted by actual device configurations, including making MTU for DF packets the same for either MPLS or DMVPN. (For example, you might want to make the two paths alike so flows that for any reason need to be redirect from one media path to the other see a consistent MTU.)

VRF lite and MPLS VRFs

We have a CE router connected to PE router. The CE router is connected via 2 links to the PE router, because we need to create two VRFs on the PE for the traffic coming from the CE to separate the traffic, so we have one vrf per link. We are running OSPF between CE and PE.. Now we need to further separate the traffic up to the CE, so Im thinking of using the VRF lite on the CE.. Can MPLS work with the VRF lite, and how to map the VRF lite VRFs on the CE to the MPLS VPN on the PE?
Is there any config examples?
Thanks in advance

VRF Lite and MPLS-VPN act independently so they can work independently. And there is no specific need for mapping. If link is for VRF A on PE so you can make it part of vrf A in CE as well. Both VRFs are independent of each other.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps4324/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a00801cddd9.html#1045190
THis document is for 4500 but logic holds the same.

Layer 3 to the Access Layer and MPLS Design Considerations

Hi,
We are about to install a new network consisting of Cat 4500s with Sup7E at the Access Layer, with Nexus 7000 at the Distribution and Core layers.
We have 14 floors with at least three 4500s on each floor. Within the office block where the Access Layer and Distribution Layer reside we need to support secure borderless networking using 802.1x to place users from different parts of the business into segregated networks at layer 3.
All switches will have the feature sets to support MPLS/ VRF / OSPF / EIGRP / BGP etc.
We quickly dismissed the idea of using VRF-Lite due to the sheer number of Vlans we would need to managage and maintain, the point to point links alone just to get one additional VRF on each floor required far too many Vlans.
As a result we are now considering deploying MPLS. The obvious benefits include scalability and manageability, the fact that all switch to switch links can now be routed, instead of having to using SVIs.
My query is one of design surrounding MPLS and how this maps to an enterprise network with a routed access layer. Do Cat 4500s become the CEs and take part in MPLS / BGP and Label Distribution, or does the BGP peering and Label Distribution only occur between the Distrubtion - Core - Distrubtion layers, mapping to the PE - P - PE topology in an ISP environment, the access layer simply uses the IGP (OSPF in this case) to learn routes ?
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Chris.

Hi Andy,
Thanks for your response.
I have been doing a little bit more research it seems the Cat 4500s do not support MPLS!! Nor do Cisco have any plans to support it on this platform. I find this a little rediculous considering the level that Cisco are pitching this platform. With the Sup 7E only VRF Lite is supported, with plans to support EVN (which still uses trunk links for logical separation).
So it looks like we are going to have to go back to the drawing board.
(perhaps we should have gone HP or Juniper!)
Chris.

Cisco Nexus 5ks EIGRP and Policy routing question.

We just got installed a METRO LINK between our primary and secondary data center (Site-A <> Site-B) I would like to be able to route data replication between these two sites over that link, instead of going over MPLS. We run EIGRP internally and BGP to the MPLS (typical scenario)
At first I thought about doing ‘Policy Based Routing’ with IP SLA to be able to track and route traffic coming from the 10.10.10.0/24 bound to 10.11.11.0/24 and track link state with IP SLA in case the metro link would go down; data replication would continue to flow over MPLS.
In researching this, I found out that Cisco NX-5ks and 6Ks don’t support IP SLA and there is no telling if they will support it any time in future releases either.
I haven’t turned on routing (EIGRP) between the two 5ks over the metro link yet.
Also, I don’t want to statically route replication traffic over the link unless I have to. It would have to be a manual change in case I need to re-route it over the MPLS.
See attached drawing
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Marramix01

can you calculate the metrics of the two different links for EIGRP?
Once you have that you would know which one EIGRP would say is the best path. Then if the MPLS link is not the primary path then you can use Offset-list to force the traffic to and from subnets and still have failover with EIGRP.
I hope I understood your problem correctly.

L3 VPN and MPLS core

Hi all,
1) I am new to MPLS and trying to configure a scenario in a non production environment. Is it possible to have L3 VPN's without using BGP in MPLS core network? For some reason I am more inclined to use RIPv2, EIGRP or OSPF in the core.
2) Is it possible to use 2600 series router as PE?
Thanks in advance.

hi SHAH
to add to the nice cooments in the discussion
the BGP used with mpls and L3 VPN called MP-BGP
the VPN in with VRFs, RD and RT each one add to the ip packet an identifier to distingush the packet with the provider network from other packet and make it uniqe to pass these identifiers from router to router especiallt from PE router to PE router u need the BGP (MP-BGP)
hope this helpful

Interview question: EIGRP and Grandmother

Hi all.
A question was asked to me a couple of months ago during an interview. I'm quite curious as to how others would respond to it. Here it is.
"If I was your grandmother, how would you make me understand EIGRP?"
I know that when the interviewer says "make me understand", it doesn't mean you should go deep into the details of the IGP. Maybe just a bird's eyeview. But still, makes you think.

I guess I'd have to relate it to something my grandmother would understand. I know she would be lost as soon as I said IP.
I would probably relate to driving in her car to get to the grocery store. Imagine if it every corner there was a traffic guard directing traffic, and every traffic guard had a map with the fastest way to get to her destination in his hand. When she gets to that intersection the traffic guard tells her which way to go. As long as all the roads are working the path she takes to the store pretty much remains the same. Now imagine that all of these guards have walkie-talkies in their hands, and if there is an accident on a road, and that road is closed that guard announces to all the other traffic guards that that road is closed and and the traffic guards are quickly able to give you an alternate route before you get stuck in traffic. The good thing about EIGRP is that these updates to traffic patterns are only sent periodically instead of all the time, this greatly reduces the amount of communication over the walkie-talkies, making it much easier for other communication to pass over them as well, while keeping everyone updated on what the best path to take to the store is.
I like trying to use analogies in my explanations to my end users. It puts the context of your discussion into terms that they can relate to and understand the general concept of. An interviewer might be asking you to do this to show, that you not only can regurgitate the answer that they're looking for, but understand it well enough to break it down into simpler terms that can be communicated to someone without technical knowledge that can still be understood.
I report to the VP of Finance/CFO here at my organization. I find myself constantly having break down complicated terms into something that he can understand in order to get budget approval for projects. I'm guessing your interviewer wanted to be sure you had the skills to be able to communicate complex IT concepts with someone who may not understand the "dictionary" explanation?

Layer 3 Etherchannel and MPLS MTU

Greetings,
If two 7609 are connected through layer 3 giga etherchannel and 7609-1 sends a frame with 1514 bytes plus two MPLS header to 7609-2, does the command mpls mtu 1522 under the giga etherchannel interface on both routers is enough?
Or it is necessary to add the global command system jumbomtu 1522 and the interface command mtu 1522 under physical gigainterfaces participating on the channel?
Cisco docs say many platforms will accept frames higher than 1500 bytes (up to 24 bytes) to accommodate control flags; that is why I am considering just mpls mtu xxx is enough.
Also, reading Cisco doc I understood that system jumbomtu xxxx and mtu xxxx should be used together. I tested sending frames higher than 1514 bytes (without MPLS tags) and system jumbomtu xxxx alone was not enough, ping failed; it was necessary to add mtu xxxx under the interface. Do you have a different experience?
Thanks,
Alaerte Gladston Vidali
IBM Global Services - SO
Tel.55+11+2121-2879 Fax:55+11+2121-2449

Hi
We had some peculiar exp with 7600 (7609/7606) boxes in which we did change the physical mtu of the interface instead of mpls mtu.
Again that did the trick for us even in 7200 where we monitored the same kinda behaviour..
regds

MP-BGP and MPLS multipath load sharing

Hi,
I am trying to PoC MPLS multi path load sharing by using per-PE-per-VRF RDs in the network.
I have a simple lab setup with AS65000 which consists of SITE1 PE1&PE2 routers (10.250.0.101 and 10.250.0.102), route reflector RR in the middle (10.250.0.55) and SITE2 PE1&PE2 routers (10.250.0.201 and 10.250.0.202). PE routers only do iBGP peering with centralized route reflector and passing route to 10.1.1.0/24 prefix (learned from single CE router) with 100:1 and 100:2 RDs for specific VRF.
Route reflector gets routes with multiple RDs, makes copies of these routes in order to make local comparison to RD 55:55 configured, uses these routes and install multiple paths into its routing table (all PE routers and RR have "maximum-paths eibgp 4" configured):
RR#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all
BGP table version is 7, local router ID is 10.250.0.55
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
   Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
Route Distinguisher: 55:55 (default for vrf VRF-A) VRF Router ID 10.250.0.55
* i10.1.1.0/24      10.250.0.102             0    100      0 65001 i
*>i                 10.250.0.101             0    100      0 65001 i
Route Distinguisher: 100:1
*>i10.1.1.0/24      10.250.0.101             0    100      0 65001 i
Route Distinguisher: 100:2
*>i10.1.1.0/24      10.250.0.102             0    100      0 65001 i
RR#sh ip route vrf VRF-A
<output omitted>
     10.0.0.0/8 is variably subnetted, 2 subnets, 2 masks
B       10.1.1.0/24 [200/0] via 10.250.0.102, 00:45:52
                          [200/0] via 10.250.0.101, 00:46:22
BUT, for some reason RR doest reflects routes with multiple RDs down to SITE2 PE1&PE2 - its own clients:
RR#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.250.0.201 advertised-routes
Total number of prefixes 0
RR#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.250.0.202 advertised-routes
Total number of prefixes 0
Here comes RR BGP configuration:
router bgp 65000
no synchronization
bgp router-id 10.250.0.55
bgp cluster-id 1.1.1.1
bgp log-neighbor-changes
neighbor 10.250.0.101 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.101 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.101 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.101 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 10.250.0.102 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.102 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.102 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.102 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 10.250.0.201 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.201 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.201 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.201 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 10.250.0.202 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.202 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.202 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.202 soft-reconfiguration inbound
no auto-summary
address-family vpnv4
neighbor 10.250.0.101 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.101 send-community both
neighbor 10.250.0.102 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.102 send-community both
neighbor 10.250.0.201 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.201 send-community both
neighbor 10.250.0.202 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.202 send-community both
exit-address-family
address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-A
maximum-paths eibgp 4
no synchronization
bgp router-id 10.250.0.55
network 10.255.1.1 mask 255.255.255.255
exit-address-family
SITE1 PE1 configuration:
router bgp 65000
no synchronization
bgp router-id 10.250.0.101
bgp log-neighbor-changes
neighbor 10.250.0.55 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.55 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.55 soft-reconfiguration inbound
no auto-summary
address-family vpnv4
neighbor 10.250.0.55 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.55 send-community both
exit-address-family
address-family ipv4 vrf VRF-A
neighbor 10.1.101.2 remote-as 65001
neighbor 10.1.101.2 activate
neighbor 10.1.101.2 soft-reconfiguration inbound
maximum-paths eibgp 4
no synchronization
bgp router-id 10.250.0.101
exit-address-family
SITE1 PE2 configuration is similar to SITE1 PE1. They both do eBGP peering with dualhomed CE router in AS65001 which announces 10.1.1.0/24 prefix into VRF-A table.
My question is: clearly, the issue is that RR doesn't reflect any routes to its clients (SITE2 PE1&PE2) for 10.1.1.0/24 prefix with 100:1 and 100:2 RDs that dont match it's locally configured RD 55:55 for VRF-A, although they are present in its BGP/RIB tables and used for multipathing. Is this an expected behavior or some feature limitation for specific platform or IOS version? Currently, in this test lab setup I run IOS 12.4(24)T8 on all the devices.
Please, let me know if any further details are needed to get an idea of why this well known and widely used feature is not working correctly in my case. Thanks a lot!
Regards,
Sergey

Hi Ashish,
I tried to remove VRF and address family configurations completely from RR.
router bgp 65000
no synchronization
bgp router-id 10.250.0.55
bgp cluster-id 1.1.1.1
bgp log-neighbor-changes
neighbor 10.250.0.101 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.101 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.101 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.101 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 10.250.0.102 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.102 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.102 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.102 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 10.250.0.201 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.201 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.201 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.201 soft-reconfiguration inbound
neighbor 10.250.0.202 remote-as 65000
neighbor 10.250.0.202 update-source Loopback0
neighbor 10.250.0.202 route-reflector-client
neighbor 10.250.0.202 soft-reconfiguration inbound
no auto-summary
address-family vpnv4
neighbor 10.250.0.101 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.101 send-community both
neighbor 10.250.0.102 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.102 send-community both
neighbor 10.250.0.201 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.201 send-community both
neighbor 10.250.0.202 activate
neighbor 10.250.0.202 send-community both
exit-address-family
After this, RR doesn't accept any routes at all from S1PE1&S1PE2 routers, thus not reflecting any routes down to its clients S2PE1&S2PE2 as well:
S1PE1#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all
BGP table version is 6, local router ID is 10.250.0.101
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
   Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
Route Distinguisher: 100:1 (default for vrf VRF-A) VRF Router ID 10.250.0.101
*> 10.1.1.0/24      10.1.101.2               0             0 65001 i
S1PE1#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.250.0.55 advertised-routes
BGP table version is 6, local router ID is 10.250.0.101
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
   Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
Route Distinguisher: 100:1 (default for vrf VRF-A) VRF Router ID 10.250.0.101
*> 10.1.1.0/24      10.1.101.2               0             0 65001 i
Total number of prefixes 1
S1PE2#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all
BGP table version is 6, local router ID is 10.250.0.102
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
   Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
Route Distinguisher: 100:2 (default for vrf VRF-A) VRF Router ID 10.250.0.102
*> 10.1.1.0/24      10.1.201.2               0             0 65001 i
S1PE2#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.250.0.55 advertised-routes
BGP table version is 6, local router ID is 10.250.0.102
Status codes: s suppressed, d damped, h history, * valid, > best, i - internal,
              r RIB-failure, S Stale
Origin codes: i - IGP, e - EGP, ? - incomplete
   Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
Route Distinguisher: 100:2 (default for vrf VRF-A) VRF Router ID 10.250.0.102
*> 10.1.1.0/24      10.1.201.2               0             0 65001 i
Total number of prefixes 1
RR#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all
RR#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.250.0.101 routes
Total number of prefixes 0
RR#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.250.0.102 routes
Total number of prefixes 0
Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks.
Regards,
Sergey

Providers that support EIGRP for MPLS

There doesn't seem to be any list of these and BGP and redistribution drive me nuts. I've heard Sprint offers this but there must be others?
Thanks in advance!

Hello Mloraditch,
it is more a question of commercial policies rather then a technical limit
I think some provider may charge more for the use of EIGRP as PE-CE.
This is because the PE node has to perform the redistribution of EIGRP in MP BGP for your benefit.
Hope to help
Giuseppe

EIGRP and MPLS

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for