MPLS VPNs alongwith T1 and sub-rate SONET/SDH connections

Hi,
I know this question might seem out of place in this particular forum, I apologize for that.
We currently offer MPLS VPN services on my Cisco 7600 platform with supported FE/GE modules.
Coming to my question, can I offer DS0/T1 services without adding a new optical (SONET/SDH) box and on the same 7600 (I have enough slots available)
I was thinking of this particular module for delivering the required additional services:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/7600/install_config/12.2SX_OSM_config/Prtn.html
and
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/7600/install_config/12.2SX_OSM_config/crns.html
Is anyone of you guys doing something similar?
I would request for some inputs w.r.t. stability and/or other factors I should consider before I start to seriously think of them as an alternative option instead of going for separate Optical devices.
P.S.: This is not MPLS VPNs on subrate interfaces but subrate/T1 'IPLC' service by itself.
Thanks
Cheers
~sultan

No, you will need to put an additional module to support DS0/T1 services on your 7600. Following link may help you
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2831/products_data_sheet09186a008015cfe9.html

Similar Messages

  • Multihoming Primary/Backup PE MPLS VPN

    Hi there,
    I kind of stuck of implementing and configuring Primary/Backup scenario for MPLS VPN enviroment.
    Currently, only singe CE router connected to 2 PE router, Primary PE and Backup PE in the same POP.
    PE-CE IGP is running OSPF. On CE router prespective, how do I achieve primary/backup scenario and on other remote PE, how does MPLS VPN cloud noticed that there is Primary and Backup PE towords this CE router?
    Any configuration or sample out there? Appreciate for the help.
    regards,
    maher

    Hello Maher,
    I would try to set the interface metric to a higher value for the backup PE. With OSPF->BGP redistribution you should then get a higher MED in BGP making the path less preferable. Example:
    interface Serial0/0
    description to primary PE
    ip ospf cost 100
    interface Serial0/1
    description to backup PE
    ip ospf cost 1000
    Alternatively you could modify the MED while redistributiing into BGP:
    router bgp 65000
    address-family ipv4 vrf VRFname
    redistribute ospf 123 vrf VRFname match internal external route-map OSPF2BGP
    route-map OSPF2BGP permit 10
    set metric 10000
    Hope this helps! Please rate all posts.
    Regards, Martin

  • MPLS vpn test lab

    I am trying to setup a basic lab. I have the following setup:-
    CE1->PE1->P1->PE2->CE2. I have attached the relevant configs.
    All the CE & PE routers are 2600's and the P1 router is a 7206VXR. I am running OSPF in the MPLS network between the PE & P routers. I am using ldp as the label distribution protocol. BGP is running between the CE & PE routers.
    I have a couple of questions:-
    1) Basic MPLS setup. I think this is working in that if i ping from the LAN side of the CE1 to the LAN side of the CE2 it works. The P1 router has no knowledge of these subnets. However a "sh mpls forwarding-table" command on the PE routers shows no bytes tag switched and yet if i do a "debug mpls packet" on the P1 router i can see the packets going through. If the P1 router doesn't know the LAN subnets then am i right to assume it must be label switching ?
    2) The configs attached are to test a VPN setup. I have the MPLS & VPN architectures book and i have gone through all the show commands to troubleshoot and it all looks right. The routes are in the vrf routing table, the mpls forwarding table looks okay but i cannot ping from CE1 to CE2.
    If i debug on the P1 router i can see the packets coming in with 2 labels as expected but i can't see them being transmitted.
    I have done some searching and know that 2600's are not officially supported but my understanding is that the features i need are on the routers. I have tried a number of different IOS versions but to no avail.
    Any help would be much appreciated
    Jon

    thanks for your responses
    1) yes it's a typo, i do have the "ip vrf forwarding NR_prod" on the fa0/0 interfaces on the PE routers.
    2) Basic mpls - i meant no VPN's etc. I have ospf between the PE & P routers. I have MP-BGP between PE1 & PE2. Between the PE & CE routers i am running standard BGP.
    3) All 2600 routers are 2621XM's. The IOS i am trying with is c2600-spservicesk9-mz.123-4.T4.bin altho i have also tried c2600-spservicesk9-mz.123-8.T10.bin and c2600-telco-mz.123-7.T12.bin.
    4) On the 7200 i'm running c7200-p-mz.123-16.bin and have also tried c7200-p-mz.124-5.bin
    5) The packet from PE1 comes into the P1 router labelled as 19/24. The mpls forwarding table on P1 has the entry
    19 Untagged 81.144.17.55/32 2137750 Fa0/1 172.16.1.6
    which is correct as far as i can see as this is PE2.
    I have included the sh mpls output from the P1 router and a sh ver of one of the PE routers ( they are both the same ).
    Once again, many thanks for your replies.

  • Ask the Expert:Concepts, Configuration and Troubleshooting Layer 2 MPLS VPN – Any Transport over MPLS (AToM)

    With Vignesh R. P.
    Welcome to the Cisco Support Community Ask the Expert conversation.This is an opportunity to learn and ask questions about  concept, configuration and troubleshooting Layer 2 MPLS VPN - Any Transport over MPLS (AToM) with Vignesh R. P.
    Cisco Any Transport over MPLS (AToM) is a solution for transporting Layer 2 packets over an MPLS backbone. It enables Service Providers to supply connectivity between customer sites with existing data link layer (Layer 2) networks via a single, integrated, packet-based network infrastructure: a Cisco MPLS network. Instead of using separate networks with network management environments, service providers can deliver Layer 2 connections over an MPLS backbone. AToM provides a common framework to encapsulate and transport supported Layer 2 traffic types over an MPLS network core.
    Vignesh R. P. is a customer support engineer in the Cisco High Touch Technical Support center in Bangalore, India, supporting Cisco's major service provider customers in routing and MPLS technologies. His areas of expertise include routing, switching, and MPLS. Previously at Cisco he worked as a network consulting engineer for enterprise customers. He has been in the networking industry for 8 years and holds CCIE certification in the Routing & Switching and Service Provider tracks.
    Remember to use the rating system to let Vignesh know if you have received an adequate response. 
    Vignesh might not be able to answer each question due to the volume expected during this event. Remember that you can continue the conversation on the  Service Provider sub-community discussion forum shortly after the event. This event lasts through through September 21, 2012. Visit this forum often to view responses to your questions and the questions of other community members.

    Hi Tenaro,
    AToM stands for Any Transport over MPLS and it is Cisco's terminology used for Layer 2 MPLS VPN or Virtual Private Wire Service. It is basically a Layer 2 Point-to-Point Service. AToM basically supports various Layer 2 protocols like Ethernet, HDLC, PPP, ATM and Frame Relay.
    The customer routers interconnect with the service provider routers at Layer 2. AToM eliminates the need for the legacy network from the service provider carrying these kinds of traffic and integrates this service into the MPLS network that already transports the MPLS VPN traffic.
    AToM is an open standards-based architecture that uses the label switching architecture of MPLS and can be integrated into any network that is running MPLS. The advantage to the customer is that they do not need to change anything. Their routers that are connecting to the service provider routers can still use the same Layer 2 encapsulation type as before and do not need to run an IP routing protocol to the provider edge routers as in the MPLS VPN solution.
    The service provider does not need to change anything on the provider (P) routers in the core of the MPLS network. The intelligence to support AToM sits entirely on the PE routers. The core label switching routers (LSRs) only switch labeled packets, whereas the edge LSRs impose and dispose of labels on the Layer 2 frames.
    Whereas pseudowire is a connection between the PE routers and emulates a wire that is carrying Layer 2 frames. Pseudowires use tunneling. The Layer 2 frames are encapsulated into a labeled (MPLS) packet. The result is that the specific Layer 2 service—its operation and characteristics—is emulated across a Packet Switched Network.
    Another technology that more or less achieves the result of AToM is L2TPV3. In the case of L2TPV3 Layer 2 frames are encapsulated into an IP packet instead of a labelled MPLS packet.
    Hope the above explanation helps you. Kindly revert incase of further clarification required.
    Thanks & Regards,
    Vignesh R P

  • Performance end to end testing and comparison between MPLS VPN and VPLS VPN

    Hi,
    I am student of MSc Network Security and as for my project which is " Comparison between MPLS L3 VPN and VPLS VPN, performance monitoring by end to end testing " I have heard a lot of buzz about VPLS as becoming NGN, I wanted to exppore that and produce a comparison report of which technology is better. To accomplish this I am using GNS3, with respect to the MPLS L3 VPN lab setup that is not a problem but I am stuck at the VPLS part how to setup that ? I have searched but unable to find any cost effective mean, even it is not possible in the university lab as we dont have 7600 series
    I would appreciate any support, guidence, advice.
    Thanks
    Shahbaz

    Hi Shahbaz,
    I am not completely sure I understand your request.
    MPLS VPN and VPLS are 2 technologies meant to address to different needs, L3 VPN as opposed as L2 VPN. Not completely sure how you would compare them in terms of performance. Would you compare the performance of a F1 racing car with a Rally racing car?
    From the ISP point of view there is little difference (if we don't want to consider the specific inherent peculiarities of each technology) , as in the very basic scenarios we can boil down to the following basic operations for both:
    Ingress PE impose 2 labels (at least)
    Core Ps swap top most MPLS label
    Egress PE removes last label exposing underlying packet or frame.
    So whether the LSRs deal with underlying L2 frames or L3 IP packets there is no real difference in terms of performance (actually the P routers don't even notice any difference).
    About simulators, I am not aware of anyone able to simulate a L2 VPN (AtoM or VPLS).
    Riccardo

  • CC&B : Sub rates and proration

    Dear CC&B experts,
    We would like to use sub rates with CC&B 2.3.1 release but we are facing the following issue. During the lifecycle of a rate schedule, we would like to add or remove a sub rate with taking into account possible prorations.
    For example, the sub rate 1 is effective only during year 2011 and the sub rate 2 is effective only during year 2012. If I create a bill across the two years, I would like CC&B to make a proration between the 2 sub rates. But this can not be done because a sub rate is linked to a rate schedule without effective dates.
    One solution should be using rate versions inside a sub rate. For example, instead of removing a sub rate, we could create a new rate version that will bill nothing. As we can not create an empty rate version, we should add a dummy rate component in the new rate version that will do nothing. This solution works but, to my opinion, is a little bit dirty.
    Do you have any ideas to solve this issue ?
    Many thanks.
    Regards,
    Johann
    Edited by: 884310 on 12 sept. 2011 02:12

    Johann,
    We use subrate for Rate schedules having similar set of tax rate components to gain the benefit of reusibilty. I think your proration requirement can be done by using 1 subrate with 2 Rate versions with proper effective date i.e. 2011 and 2012...
    Regards,
    Wasif

  • Full mesh VPN solution for on MPLS network with PE and CPEs

    Hi,
    We are trying to evaluate some best solution for Hub-Spoke mesh vpn solution in a MPLS network. The VPN hub router will be in PE router and all the VPN spoke will be in CPE.
    Can someone please let us know what will be the best vpn solution, we understands that there will be some technical limitations going with GETVPN but still we did counld find any documenation for possiblity of using DMVPN.
    How about the recent flexvpn, can fex-vpn work on this requirement, where can i get a design/configuration document.?
    thanks in advance.

    Hello,
    GetVPN is intended for (ANY-to-ANY) type of VPN communication, over an MPLS network with Hub and Spoke Topology, your best Option is to look for Cisco (DMVPN) implementation where this type of VPN is primarily designed for Hub & Spoke.
    Regards,
    Mohamed

  • MPLS VPNs - Latency

    Hello All,
    I have a MPLS VPN setup for one of my sites. We have a 10M pipe (Ethernet handoff) from the MPLS SP, and it is divided into 3 VRFs.
    6M - Corp traffic
    2M - VRF1
    2M - VRF2
    The users are facing lot of slowness while trying to access application on VRF1. I can see the utilization on the VRF1 is almost 60% of it's total capacity (2M). Yesterday when trying to ping across to the VRF1 Peer in the MPLS cloud, I was getting a Max response time of 930ms.
    xxxxx#sh int FastEthernet0/3/0.1221
    FastEthernet0/3/0.1221 is up, line protocol is up
      Hardware is FastEthernet, address is 503d.e531.f9ed (bia 503d.e531.f9ed)
      Description: xxxxx
      Internet address is x.x.x.x/30
      MTU 1500 bytes, BW 2000 Kbit, DLY 1000 usec,
         reliability 255/255, txload 71/255, rxload 151/255
      Encapsulation 802.1Q Virtual LAN, Vlan ID  1221.
      ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
      Last clearing of "show interface" counters never
    I also see a lot of Output drops on the physical interface Fa0/3/0. Before going to the service provider, can you please tell me if this can be an issue with the way QoS is configured on these VRFs?
    xxxxxxx#sh int FastEthernet0/3/0 | inc drops
      Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops: 3665
    Appreciate your help.
    Thanks
    Mikey

    Hi Kishore,
    Thanks for the clarification. Let me speak to the service provider and see if we can sort out the Output drops issue.
    I had a few more queries.
    1) Will output drops also contribute to the latency here?
    2) The show int fa0/3/0.1221 output below only shows the load on the physical interface (fa0/3/0) and not of that particuar interface.Right?
    xxxxxx#sh int fa0/3/0.1221 | inc load
         reliability 255/255, txload 49/255, rxload 94/255
    xxxxx#sh int fa0/3/0 | inc load
         reliability 255/255, txload 49/255, rxload 94/255
    I can try and enable IP accounting on that sub-interface (VRF) and see the load. Thoughts?
    3) As you said, if the 2M gets maxed out I would see latency as the shaper is getting fully utilized. But I don't see that on the interface load as mentioned above? I have pasted the ping response during the time load output was taken. I can;t read much into the policy map output, but does it talk anything about 2M being fully utilized and hence packets getting dropped.
    xxxxxxx#ping vrf ABC x.x.x.x re 1000
    Type escape sequence to abort.
    Sending 1000, 100-byte ICMP Echos to x.x.x.x, timeout is 2 seconds:
    Success rate is 99 percent (997/1000), round-trip min/avg/max = 12/216/1972 ms
    xxxx#sh policy-map interface fa0/3/0.1221
    FastEthernet0/3/0.1221
      Service-policy output: ABC
        Class-map: class-default (match-any)
          114998 packets, 36909265 bytes
          5 minute offered rate 11000 bps, drop rate 0 bps
          Match: any
          Traffic Shaping
               Target/Average   Byte   Sustain   Excess    Interval  Increment
                 Rate           Limit  bits/int  bits/int  (ms)      (bytes)
              2000000/2000000   12500  50000     50000     25        6250
            Adapt  Queue     Packets   Bytes     Packets   Bytes     Shaping
            Active Depth                         Delayed   Delayed   Active
            -      0         114998    36909265  1667      2329112   no
    Thanks
    Mikey

  • Selective Route Import/Export in MPLS VPN

    Champs
    I have multiple brach locations and 3 DC locations.DC locations host my internal applications , DC's  also have central Internet breakout for the region. My requirement is to have full mesh MPLS-VPN but at same time brach location Internet access should be from nearest IDC in the region  if nearest IDC is not availalbe it should go to second nearest DC for internet.I have decided which are primary and seconday DC for Internet breakout. How can this be achieved in MPLS-VPN scenario.Logically i feel , i have to announce specific LAN subnet and default route(with different BGP attribute like AS Path)  from all 3 DCs. Spokes in the specific region should be able to import default route  from primary DC and secondary DCs only  using some route filter?
    Regards
    V

    Hello Aaron,
    the route example works for all routers except the one, where the VRF vpn2 is configured. What you can do for management purposes is either to connect through a neighbor router using packet leaking or configure another Loopback into VRF vpn2.
    The last option (and my recommendation) is to establish another separate IP connection from your NMS to the MPLS core. Once VRFs are failing (for whatever reason, f.e. erroneously deleted) you might just not get connectivity to your backbone anymore to repair what went wrong.
    So I would create an "interconnection router" with an interface in the VRF vpn2 and one interface in global IP routing table. This way you will still be able to access PEs, even if VRFs or MBGP is gone.
    Hope this helps! Please rate all posts.
    Regards, Martin

  • GRE with VRF on MPLS/VPN

    Hi.
    Backbone network is running MPLS/VPN.
    I have one VRF (VRF-A) for client VPN network.
    One requirement is to configure another VRF (VRF-B) for this client for a separate public VRF connection.
    Sub-interfacing not allowed on CE-to-PE due to access provider limitation.
    So GRE is our option.
    CE config:
    Note: CE is running on global. VRF-A is configured at PE.
    But will add VRF-B here for the  requirement.
    interface Tunnel0
      ip vrf forwarding VRF-B
    ip address 10.12.25.22 255.255.255.252
    tunnel source GigabitEthernet0/1
    tunnel destination 10.12.0.133
    PE1 config:
    interface Tunnel0
    ip vrf forwarding VRF-B
    ip address 10.12.25.21 255.255.255.252
    tunnel source Loopback133
    tunnel destination 10.12.26.54
    tunnel vrf VRF-A
    Tunnel works and can ping point-to-point IP address.
    CE LAN IP for VRF-B  is configured as static route at PE1
    PE1:
    ip route vrf VRF-B 192.168.96.0 255.255.255.0 Tunnel0 10.12.25.22
    But from PE2 which is directly connected to PE1 (MPLS/LDP running), connectivity doesnt works.
    From PE2:
    - I can ping tunnel0 interface of PE1
    - I cant ping tunnel0 interface of CE
    Routing is all good and present in the routing table.
    From CE:
    - I can ping any VRF-B loopback interface of PE1
    - But not VRF-B loopback interfaces PE2 (even if routing is all good)
    PE1/PE2 are 7600 SRC3/SRD6.
    Any problem with 7600 on this?
    Need comments/suggestions.

    Hi Allan,
    what is running between PE1 and PE2 ( what I mean is any routing protocol).
    If No, then PE2 has no ways of knowing GRE tunnel IP prefixes and hence I suppose those will not be in its CEF table...
    If Yes, then check are those Prefixes available in LDP table...
    Regards,
    Smitesh

  • Mapping Model in MPLS VPNs

    Hi:
    Based on paper titled "L3 MPLS VPN Enterprise Consumer Guide" page 52, figure 44. (http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/netsol/ns465/networking_solutions_white_papers_list.html).
    1) The figure discards the "streaming video" and "bulk data" traffics within the mapping process. Why? What happens with these traffics? Both traffics are discarded or simply they need to be mapped to "Best Effort"? Please explain.
    2)In the same figure, "Interactive Video" is mapped to "Realtime" SP class with "Voice" traffic. Is this "Interactive Video" traffic always no TCP-based? If the opposite is true, why is it mixing TCP & UDP over the same "Realtime" class?

    Hi,
    That articles mentions that these protocols tend to use transport-layer protocols such as UDP and RTSP. That is true but there are a lot of different streaming protocols around and some of them do use TCP. In fact, even RTSP supports the use of TCP. And you can also stream via HTTP (Windows Media supports this, for example).
    So you see, there can be a mix of TCP and UDP traffic here.
    The other, more critical, reason for not mixing interactive-traffic with streaming (one-way) traffic is the drastically different jitter/latency requirements for the two. Streaming traffic will easily sustain latency in the order of seconds and jitter is not even a problem. Whereas interactive traffic will not. That is why you should not mix the two.
    Hope that helps - pls rate the post if it does.
    Paresh

  • Troubleshooting of MPLS VPN 2 Network

    I am at service provider. A user complains on Link down issue for MPLS L2VPN Link. And i log-in to user connected PE router and run the below mentioned command.
    sh mpls l2transport vc 3407
    Local intf     Local circuit              Dest address    VC ID      Status
    Gi0/2.3407     Eth VLAN 3407              202.148.199.106 3407       UP
    Guide me in analysing the output and further troubleshooting. Define the parameters observed for o\p of a command.

    Hi,
    The P routers do not need VRFs or VPN labels because they are only transporting the packets towards the PEs. They do this by looking at the IGP label. This label is advertised by LDP. This is sometimes referred to as BGP free core. Although you will often have BGP running for other purposes on the P router.
    Daniel Dib
    CCIE #37149
    Please rate helpful posts.

  • L3 MPLS-VPN with ATM Interfaces

    Hi
    I tacked a L3 MPLS-VPN from a MPLS service provider.My VPN have three points.
    In first point, I have a PA-A3-OC3 over cisco router 7206. how can I config to place PVC1/2 into VPN?

    You need that pvc to be under a separate sub-interface and then you can configure "ip vrf for " under that sub-interface.
    Hope this helps,

  • IP Precedence vs DSCP in MPLS VPN

    Hi there,
    From my reading through Cisco website, I noticed that most of implementation suggested to use DSCP values and sometimes use IP Precedence in CE/PE class-map for classfication and markings.
    What is the most appropriate or maybe best practise to configure by using IP Precedence or DSCP? Is there any difference in terms of providing QoS especially in MPLS VPN enviroment?
    Thanks.
    maher

    Hi Maher,
    DiffServ offers you the advantage of a 6-bit field so that you can offer much more granular QoS. IP Precedence only offers you 3 bits so that the QoS offered is fairly coarse. These days, most implementations would be using DSCP for that reason.
    Within an MPLS core, the QoS setting is carried within the EXP field, which is a 3-bit field. Therefore, even if you use 6-bits for DSCP at the edge, you will end up having to map those 6-bits into 3-bits for carriage across the MPLS network. That is not a problem, however. You are bound to get more congestion at the edges so you need more granular QoS markings there. The core of a network is unlikely to be congested so 3 bits of QoS marking is sufficient.
    Hope that helps - pls rate the post if it does.
    Paresh

  • Implemting a Sprint MPLS/VPN

    Hello
    I'm implmenting a Sprint MPLS/VPN network. This is a point to point between two of my locations. The connection is handed of to me as a serial connection and I will be connecting to cisco 2800 on bothe ends. Does anyone have what a sample config might look like for my Cisco rotuer?
    Thanks in advance

    HI, [Pls Rate if HELPS]
    In addition to JOE POST,
    You need to configure as normal CE Router. You can handover your Network Traffic either via some DYNAMIC Routing Protocols (BGP, EIGRP, OSPF, RIP) or Static Routing at LAST MILE towards your Service Provider.
    At the Service Provider Side, the Connected Interface with your CE will be added with "ip vrf forwarding " command. Where seperate Routing instance will be maintained on top of Global Routing Table. The MPLS Labels are swapped over their Backbone / partner - NNI to carry your traffic over a Label Switched Path.
    For an MPLS to work, the IP-CEF will be enabled. This kind of MPLS Technology, will enable fast processing of Packets and Traffic over the Large Scale Network.
    Similarly the RT & RD Values are used to distinguish the Customer Prefixes. The RT export and Import will be done at end - to - end at Service Provider Side Routers to make the HO & BO to communicate.
    The CE Router will not involve any MPLS / VRF Configuration Technology.
    Hope I am Informative.
    Pls Rate if HELPS
    Best Regards,
    Guru Prasad R

Maybe you are looking for