[cmaster-next] RD/RT discussion from Technical Meeting Yesterday
During the meeting we discussed option #6 as the viable option. Reasoning: Closely modeled the ietf way of thinking Here it is in a broad outline: vrf <VRFNAME1> ip route … <---- Vrf specific Route router bgp XXX ! (address-family ipv4) network 1.2.3.0/24 route-map foo neighbor ... ! CE session redistribute ospf ! CE setup for OSPF ! no special parameters on redistribute needed; VRF name is already OK <here> - never RD/RT router ospf <INSTANCENUM> ! (is this under vrf config?) redistribute bgp ... router bgp AAA ! core instance address-family vpnv4 | vpnv6 | evpn Network <vpnv4> or <RT2/RT5> config [ rd <> ( could be used) ?] neighbor ... ! PE session vrf <VRFNAME1> rt {import|export|both} RTLIST rd {automatic|VALUE} network <> [<rd>] ! <- most used hopefully router bgp BBB ! core instance vrf <VRFNAME2> rt {import|export|both} RTLIST ! can have value overlap rd {automatic|VALUE} address-family vpnv4 | evpn Network <vpnv4> or <RT2/RT5> config neighbor ... ! PE session Questions asked: For VRF's would we extend this to MAC VRF's also? donald
Looks good! A couple of minor points below. On 11/30/2016 8:39 AM, Donald Sharp wrote:
During the meeting we discussed option #6 as the viable option.
Reasoning: Closely modeled the ietf way of thinking
Here it is in a broad outline:
vrf <VRFNAME1>
ip route … <---- Vrf specific Route So what happens for an RD override here? network with RD as listed below?
router bgp XXX
! (address-family ipv4)
network 1.2.3.0/24 route-map foo
neighbor ... ! CE session
redistribute ospf ! CE setup for OSPF
! no special parameters on redistribute needed; VRF name is already OK
<here> - never RD/RT
router ospf <INSTANCENUM> ! (is this under vrf config?)
redistribute bgp
...
router bgp AAA ! core instance
address-family vpnv4 | vpnv6 | evpn
Network <vpnv4> or <RT2/RT5> config [ rd <> ( could be used) ?]
neighbor ... ! PE session
vrf <VRFNAME1>
rt {import|export|both} RTLIST
rd {automatic|VALUE}
network <> [<rd>] ! <- most used hopefully
router bgp BBB ! core instance
vrf <VRFNAME2>
rt {import|export|both} RTLIST ! can have value overlap
rd {automatic|VALUE}
address-family vpnv4 | evpn
Network <vpnv4> or <RT2/RT5> config
neighbor ... ! PE session
Questions asked:
For VRF's would we extend this to MAC VRF's also? IMO yes (plus some additional EVPN info under the core instance and perhaps a new 'bridge|mac' statement at the same level as router ). Lou
donald
_______________________________________________ cmaster-next mailing list cmaster-next@lists.nox.tf https://lists.nox.tf/listinfo/cmaster-next
Hi all, On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 3:26 PM, Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> wrote:
router bgp AAA ! core instance
address-family vpnv4 | vpnv6 | evpn
Network <vpnv4> or <RT2/RT5> config [ rd <> ( could be used) ?]
neighbor ... ! PE session
vrf <VRFNAME1>
rt {import|export|both} RTLIST
rd {automatic|VALUE}
network <> [<rd>] ! <- most used hopefully
I had one question about network command under bgp vrf subnode. It does the same as if I was using network under address-family subnode. Right ? If yes, then I suppose that the BGP daemon can be configured with 2 addresses families. Let's suppose EVPN and VPNv4. So, does that mean that the command is applied to both families ?
For VRF's would we extend this to MAC VRF's also?
IMO yes (plus some additional EVPN info under the core instance and perhaps a new 'bridge|mac' statement at the same level as router ). Lou
From [EVPN - notes on the Cumulus implementation], I was wondering if it was possible to add vni subcommand under bgp vrf subnode. As mentioned by cumulus documentation, the RDs are formed as "RouterID:VNI" and the RTs (import and export) are formed using "AS:VNI". Having that command under VRF coud mean that with VNI, the RD and RT would be automatically set ?
Regards, Philippe
participants (3)
-
Donald Sharp -
Lou Berger -
Philippe Guibert