VRF Format Issue

Unanswered Question
Aug 13th, 2007
User Badges:
  • Silver, 250 points or more

Hi Team,



As we all know that RD format on routers is either ASN:nn or IP-address:nn, these are the two standards of RD format but I am getting a different RD format on our routers, its like this nn:ASN:nn when I investigated this I found that these rd formats are coming due to our multicast clients only, its not an RFC standard. When I tried configuring bgp vpnv4 peering between our RRs and third vendor(non Cisco) routers, it wasn?t successful.


Please help me .



Attachment: 
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
mohammedmahmoud Mon, 08/13/2007 - 12:31
User Badges:
  • Green, 3000 points or more

Hi,


There are currently three defined RD types: 0, 1, and 2.


If a Type 0 RD is specified, then the Administrator subfield and Assigned Number subfields are 2 bytes and 4 bytes, respectively:


0:AS:#


If a Type 1 RD is specified, the Administrator subfield and Assigned Number subfields are 4 bytes and 2 bytes, respectively:


1:IP:#


If a Type 2 RD is specified, the Administrator subfield and Assigned Number subfields are 4 and 2 bytes, respectively:


2:AS:#


Type 0 and 1 RDs are used when translating IPv4 prefixes into VPN-IPv4 prefixes. Type 2 RDs can be used to signal Multicast VPNs (MVPNs) (to distinguish it from unicast VPNv4 prefixes), the problem is that RD Type 2 is not standard, the new address family based advertisement method, documented in draft-nalawade-idr-mdt-safi overcomes this limitation, please do check this document:


http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6604/products_white_paper0900aecd80581f3d.shtml




HTH,

Mohammed Mahmoud.

Actions

This Discussion