IPExpert CoD: MPLS & LDP

This post contains my notes from an old version of IPX Class on Demand by Joe Astorino.

# hiding MPLS topology by just incrementing TTL 1 time when reaching the CE
router(config)# no ip mpls propagate-ttl

MPLS MTU is automatically decreased on LAN interfaces and increased on WAN interfaces.

Default mpls mtu is 1512 which supports 3 labels; MPLS MTU can be set by mpls mtu x

LDP router-id should be routable on network.

Connected routes are advertised as implicit-null label for PHP on upstream router

router(config)# mpls ldp neighbor ip labels accept acl
router(config)# mpls ldp tcp pak-priority //Kinda like setting QoS for LDP
#Like "ip accounting"
router(config-if)# mpls accounting experimental input/output
router(config-if)# mpls netflow egress
router# show mpls ldp binding // LIB
router# show mpls forwarding table // LFIB
router# show ip route // RIB
router# show ip cef ip detail //FIB

To clear LIB:

router(config)# no mpls ip
router(config)# mpls ip

PHP is the default.

Share this!

MPLS Building Blocks

IP routers make forwarding decision based on IP packet header, and local CEF and FIB table.
MPLS routers make forwarding decision based on the MPLS label and the LFIB .
MPLS is great technology these days not because it forwards the packets faster , but because of applications and solutions we can provide for our customers like MPLS VPN’s .

MPLS uses the IP routing information to determine the direction and next hop to forward a labeled packet .

Does this before the first packet even arrives.

Continue reading “MPLS Building Blocks”

Share this!

Default-route in EIGRP

I know it’s not such tricky thing, but to have in mind…

There are two solutions to originate in EIGRP:

  1. (My preferred one) Static pointing to an Interface (not next-hop) + network
    This way, there is no need of “auto-summary”, so you can use it switched off.
  2. Static pointing to next-hop + “auto-summary” + “ip default-network
Share this!

MPLS Fundamentals: 5 – MPLS-VPN

Most popular were Frame Relay or ATM technologies, providing VPN service at Layer 2. The provider had a Frame Relay or ATM backbone and supplied Layer 2 connectivity to the customer routers. This was commonly referred to as the  overlay model.

The service provider might have actually owned or managed the edge routers that were connected to the customer network. The point is that the routers were physically at the customer premises.

Peer-to-peer VPN networks existed, but they were not popular. The main reason is that they were not easy to deploy and maintain because they needed distribute lists, IP packet filters, or GRE tunnels. As explained in Chapter 1, MPLS VPN is an example of a highly scalable peer-to-peer VPN model.

The CE router does not peer with any of the CE routers from the other sites across the service provider network, as with the overlay model. The name  peer-to-peer model  is derived from the fact that the CE and PE form a peer at Layer 3.

Virtual routing/forwarding (VRF): is a VPN routing and forwarding instance. It is the name for the combination of the VPN routing table, the VRF Cisco Express Forwarding (CEF) table, and the associated IP routing protocols on the PE router.

A PE router holds the global IP routing table, but also a VRF routing table per VPN connected to the PE. Continue reading “MPLS Fundamentals: 5 – MPLS-VPN”

Share this!