Cisco Support Community
Community Member

MPLS or VRF-lite?

Will the following setup work as MPLS or VRF? The PE device is a Cisco 6506 catalyst switch.

20Servers-->(fa3/10.1)PE1--(WAN Link)->PE2(fa2/11.1)---> 10Servers

Community Member

Re: MPLS or VRF-lite?

For your requirement where all the servers come to a single vlan interface a plain vrf should suffice , i dont see any need for mpls on the last mile.

Isnt there a SP involved in the connectivity ?

Technically speaking it will work on any of the methods u have mentioned.

Re: MPLS or VRF-lite?


though agreeing with the previous post I still would like to add some info:

Multi-VRF aka VRF-lite will require a WAN encapsulation allowing subinterfaces like frame relay.

VRF lite will allow you to implement separate control planes i.e. routing tables and routing contexts. You still will need data plane separation of the traffic. In a MPLS environment data plane separation will be achieved through the VPN label. With VRF lite you need a separate FR PVC (or VLAN or ...) for global routing table and each VRF between your PE routers.

In case you can not use FR or dot1Q then your choice will be MPLS.

From a scalability point of view subinterfaces are posing more operational overhead than MPLS, which does not require WAN reconfiguration for each additional VRF.

Also QoS wise MPLS seems more simple than different FR PVCs or VLANs, as there will be one policy on the WAN link instead of a sparate policy for each PVC.

Finally overlapping VPNs and central service VPNs or the like will be much simpler with MPLS in place.

As already mentioned with the requirements given each solution will be solving your issues.

Hope this helps!

Regards, Martin

Community Member

Re: MPLS or VRF-lite?

The given setup will not work. PE ( Cisco 6506) doesn't support MPLS.

CreatePlease to create content