philxor at gmail
Aug 6, 2012, 5:27 AM
Post #2 of 2
(279 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: 6VPE deployment Issue (Core router need configure IPv6 address or not?)
[In reply to]
|
|
Both.
Phil
On Aug 6, 2012, at 2:03 AM, Xu Hu <jstuxuhu0816 [at] gmail> wrote:
> For the TTL propagate, is it feature suit for both IPv4 and IPv6, or just be suitable for IPv6?
> My understanding is suit for both.
>
> 2012/8/3 Phil Bedard <philxor [at] gmail>
> You can tell the ingress PE to not copy (propagate) the TTL value from the
> incoming IP packet to the MPLS header, by default it will. When you turn
> on the feature to not propagate TTL, it will use a value of 255 for the
> MPLS header, so this will tunnel any IP packets across the MPLS network
> making it look like a single IP hop. If you don't do this, you'll need
> to configure IPv6 on the P routers so they can send the proper response
> back to the original host. Personal preference but it's easier to just
> turn off TTL propagation.
>
> As for QoS you shouldn't lose the original QoS markings unless you
> configure it do so.
>
> Phil
>
> On 8/1/12 4:45 PM, "Aaron" <aaron1 [at] gvtc> wrote:
>
> >
> >My understanding is...
> >
> >P router isn't seen in vpvn4, unless on trace route because of ttl
> >propagate....you can disable it and make the mpls core invisible
> >
> >I recall someone (Pshem) telling me that for 6vpe the address family for
> >vpnv6 needs to be enabled on pe's (6vpe neighbors you choose to do 6vpe
> >with) (and route reflector if you choose to have one)
> >
> >Traces and pings from ce to ce I don't believe by design of mpls l3vpn's
> >(4
> >or 6) are supposed to see core.
> >
> >Don't know much about qos, but be aware of single label situation where
> >php
> >causes exp bits to be lost prior to pe arrival... your case(s) of l3vpn's
> >vpnv4/6 shouldn't apply since the have stacked labels.
> >
> >http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk828/technologies_q_and_a_item09186a00800
> >a4
> >3f5.shtml#wp27407
> >
> >Hu please check me on all this as I'm fairly new to this myself. I'm at
> >the
> >beginnings of my 6vpe deployment too. This community is so knowledgeable
> >that I will look for others to confirm or deny my understandings and then
> >grow from it.
> >
> >Aaron
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: cisco-nsp-bounces [at] puck
> >[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Xu Hu
> >Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2012 10:30 AM
> >To: cisco-nsp [at] puck
> >Subject: [c-nsp] 6VPE deployment Issue (Core router need configure IPv6
> >address or not?)
> >
> >Hi All Experts,
> >
> >Let's say the topology as below:
> >CE-1-----------PE-1-----------P---------------PE-2------------CE-2
> >PE-CE protocol OSPF, core running OSPF as IGP, on top have MPLS/VPN, LDP.
> >
> >In the IPv4 situation, when i ping from CE-1 to CE-2, will see the
> >next-hop
> >of P router.
> >
> >For the IPv6 situation, PE-1 and PE-2 running 6VPE, established the VPNv6
> >neighbor with each other, as we know the core router is unaware of IPv6,
> >so
> >by right we just need to configure the IPv6 address in PE interface which
> >towards CE side.
> >
> >My question is if we don't configure the IPv6 address in the core, so how
> >the traceroute and ping work?
> >
> >Also another thing is the QOS deployment, if we don't configure the IPv6
> >address, the DSCP value in the core will change or not by default? Or we
> >must map the DSCP value to EXP value in the ingress router?
> >
> >Thanks advance for any comments,
> >Hu Xu
> >_______________________________________________
> >cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
> >https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> >archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
|
