l***y
发帖数: 791 | 1 If in core network running a mix of the two mode (i.e. multi-vendor
environment) would it be any worse than running just just one? Junos only
supports ordered control but i think cisco runs indepedent.
my thinking is that at such time when new link comes up, you'd drop packets
for a few seconds regardless of which mode, just the location of the
blackholing would be different.
it seems that igp sync is good for these occassions, but I am guessing it
must require ordered control, and also depends on the size of the LIB it
probably does not worth the effort to put this in, as the time for label
exchange to complete could be very fast for a small-enough LIB.
Anyone's network is enabled for igp sync?
Sorry new at MPLS. :)) | s*****g
发帖数: 1055 | 2 There is no difference operation wise between ordered control vs.
independent control, just one extra configuration command, both modes are
equivalent. LDP has no idea and does not care what mode its neighbor is
running. Having said that, there is really not much practical use to have
any non/32 FECs. Only thing BGP/IGP shortcuts, VPN transport LSP need is a /
32 FEC
IGP/LDP synchronization has nothing to do with ordered or
independent control or size of LFIB. I believe IOS by default enables IGP/
LDP sync, no big deal either way.
This is decade old technologies, not worth spending time on it. Also
remember LDP is just a label distribution protocol, LDP !=MPLS | l***y
发帖数: 791 | 3 i would think igp/ldp sync has somthing to do with size of LIB. LIB != LFIB.
/
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】
: There is no difference operation wise between ordered control vs.
: independent control, just one extra configuration command, both modes are
: equivalent. LDP has no idea and does not care what mode its neighbor is
: running. Having said that, there is really not much practical use to have
: any non/32 FECs. Only thing BGP/IGP shortcuts, VPN transport LSP need is a /
: 32 FEC
: IGP/LDP synchronization has nothing to do with ordered or
: independent control or size of LFIB. I believe IOS by default enables IGP/
: LDP sync, no big deal either way.
: This is decade old technologies, not worth spending time on it. Also
| s*****g
发帖数: 1055 | 4 Right LIB!=LFIB, but one is the other one's (exact) copy and they are always
in sync. In theory, you can not predict how many LIB entries you will ever
get from your downstreams, and you don't know how much process power your
neighbor has, IGP/LDP synchronization is designed to coordinate between to
LDP peers and IGP to avoid MPLS forwarding blackholing regardless label-
mapping size or control plane processing power. Does my reasoning make
logical sense?
When you say "I think", you'd better give your reasoning, this is
engineering not science. | z**r
发帖数: 17771 | 5 not neccessary, igp won't come up if the ldp adjacency is not up
LFIB.
【在 l***y 的大作中提到】
: i would think igp/ldp sync has somthing to do with size of LIB. LIB != LFIB.
:
: /
| o*****n
发帖数: 94 | 6 太长求摘要
/
【在 s*****g 的大作中提到】
: There is no difference operation wise between ordered control vs.
: independent control, just one extra configuration command, both modes are
: equivalent. LDP has no idea and does not care what mode its neighbor is
: running. Having said that, there is really not much practical use to have
: any non/32 FECs. Only thing BGP/IGP shortcuts, VPN transport LSP need is a /
: 32 FEC
: IGP/LDP synchronization has nothing to do with ordered or
: independent control or size of LFIB. I believe IOS by default enables IGP/
: LDP sync, no big deal either way.
: This is decade old technologies, not worth spending time on it. Also
|
|
