MPLS TE tunnel protection (FRR) in a ring topology

Unanswered Question
Jul 20th, 2009
User Badges:
  • Bronze, 100 points or more

Hi Friends,

Requesting you all to please share your experiences on MPLS-TE protection (in a ring), like best practices, caveats, feasibility, 'should I really think about it', etc...



  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
mheusing Sun, 07/26/2009 - 23:49
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,

Hi Sultan,

What do you try to achieve with FRR? Which requirements do you have to meet? What is the existing network looking like, which platforms, what kind of links? I find it hard to discuss a technical solution without a context and some requirements.



sultan-shaikh Mon, 07/27/2009 - 17:01
User Badges:
  • Bronze, 100 points or more

Hello Martin,

Glad to see your response!

My objective is to achieve sub sec failover for L2/L3VPNs.

Basic background:

Currently we have two POPs for providing L2/L3VPNs, and will be adding two more.

We have FRR enabled with static LSPs.

We use 7600 for L3VPNs (7600 PE/P) and connecting to the STM backbone.

While for L2VPNs we use ME6524 (PE for L2VPN) with 7600 acting as 'P' for the same.

There are TE tunnels on 7600 for L3VPNs and 6524s for L2VPNs.

Connectivity within the POPs is through GigE links.

I hope these details would help...

Thanks again..



This Discussion