Passing MPLS traffic through 6500

Unanswered Question
Feb 25th, 2010

Dear Experts,

I have a 6500 switch running normal IP traffic . Now I want to pass some traffic through this 6500 , but i don't want this to affect the normal routing table

So I decided to do the config. as given below . Now my concern is Is there is any limitation in doing this ?

Another concern is that whether this config. will work fine if I don't have any physical interface with tag switching ?

ip vrf test
rd 1:98
route-target export 1:98
route-target import 1:98

interface Vlan10
ip vrf forwarding test
ip address

int int range gigabitEthernet 3/13 - 15
switchport access vlan 10

interface GigabitEthernet3/7

description uplink to Customer

interface GigabitEthernet3/7.1
encapsulation dot1Q 667
ip vrf forwarding test
ip address

ip route vrf

Please help me to give an answer . I will rate the helpful comments



I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 3.5 (2 ratings)
Ben Blendeman Thu, 02/25/2010 - 23:56


so what you are doing is:

create a VLAN 10 with his SVI part of the "test" VRF. In the switchports part of VLAN 10 I assume that you will attach some customer related servers or end point.

Then you create a subinterface connected with the next hop at the customer, also part of the "test" VRF.

This will create a "test" VRF routing table with 2 connected subnets: and Off course you will need a default gateway towards your next hop at the customer but here you made a small mistake:

you should include the VRF name in your static route:

ip route vrf test

After this you will have a fully operational environment without any impact on your current and global routing.



Giuseppe Larosa Fri, 02/26/2010 - 00:08

Hello Haris,

>> will work fine if I don't have any physical interface with tag switching ?

it can work if you provide a full path for the VRF, if all you want is to route packets originated in vlan 10 IP subnet to that IP next-hop you are fine.

What you have done is called VRF lite or multi VRF CE that is using VRFs without using MPLS forwarding.

if you have two or more VRFs a distinct exit point for each VRF is needed (at least at logical level)

This makes VRF lite less scalable then standard MPLS L3 VPN where you use a backbone link for all possible VRFs by using MPLS forwarding plane.

Hope to help


Haris P Fri, 02/26/2010 - 12:04

Dear Giuseppe ,

Thanks for your helpful answer ..

I rated it




This Discussion