INE CCIE SP Full Scale Lab 3 Task 4.6

Hi guys,

   I cant get my head around this task as I´ve been trying for the last 5 hours and getting no where.I do understand the bgp + lables scenario on site 2 but still somewhat not too sure about the VPNv4 prefix advertisement . I have checked the workbook solution and it does not mention any VPNv4 peering on R5 for R1 as I´ve pasted below.I was just wondering how this vrf would be advertised to R5 if there aren´t any VPNv4 peering!!I did try peering VPNv4 peering and managed to advetise the prefixes to R1(VPNv4 route reflector which peers with XR2 ) but I still do not have reachability between the sites.Could anyone be kind enough to shed some light.I would appreciate if you could only tell me the bgp peerings required for this set up to work (R5 to R1 VPNv4 peering,R1 to XR2 VPNv4 etc.

  One more thing,why is the need for advertising lo1 under vrf on R1?

R1

address-family ipv4 vrf TWO
no synchronization
network 192.168.0.1 mask 255.255.255.255
exit-address-family

 

 

 

 

R5:
vrf definition TWO
rd 65001:1
!
address-family ipv4
route-target export 65001:1
route-target import 65001:1
exit-address-family
!
router bgp 65001
neighbor 10.0.0.1 update-source Loopback0
!
router rip
!
address-family ipv4 vrf TWO
redistribute bgp 65001 metric 1
exit-address-family
!
router ospf 100
mpls ldp autoconfig

 

 

Kind regards,

USHA

 

 

 

 

Comments

  • Do you have MPLS enabled between R1 and R5? And yes, you need VPNv4 peering between R1 and R5, either full-mesh or via RR.

    Cheers,

    AB.

  • Hi Amit,

      I´ve configured R1 as the Vpnv4 RR and I do have the mpls enabled between both.What I´m trying to figure out is the routing flow.So we have,

    1.vrf redistributed in R5 (rr client) with R1

    2.R1 has VPNv4 peering with XR2 on site 2

    3.R1 is receiving the prefixes from site 2

     

    R1#sh ip bgp vpnv4 all neighbors 10.0.0.20 routes | be Network
       Network          Next Hop            Metric LocPrf Weight Path
    Route Distinguisher: 65001:1 (default for vrf TWO)
    *>i192.168.0.6/32   10.0.0.6                 0    100      0 ?
    *>i192.168.0.10/32  10.0.0.6                 1    100      0 ?
    *>i192.168.10.0     10.0.0.6                 1    100      0 ?
    *>i192.168.106.0    10.0.0.6                 0    100      0 ?

    I guess we´d need to redistribute these routes on R5 to vrf process which in not mentioned in WB,what I do not understand the advertisement of lo1 of XR2(192.168.0.10) in vrf process,what purpose does it serve.I just want to know the rouitng flow before I get on the data flow .Any help would be much appreciated.

     

     

  • Not sure if you realised, this lab gets you to build L3VPN over L3VPN. In this case, R1, R5 in site-1 are PE routers with R1 as RR, and XR2 and other router (cant remember that one) in site-2 are also PE routers.

    VRF TWO on these routers is the customer VRF. You need to advertise the routes for this VRF as VPNv4 routes between these PEs.

    I dont want to take the fun away so hope this helps.

    Cheers,

    AB.

  • Hi Amit,

      I´m just getting the jist of it regarding the L3VPN over L3VPN but the WB does not state any VPNV4 peering between R1 and XR2 only ipv4 peering.I´m just wondering how would the site2 learn about these vrf TWO prefixes if there aren´t any VPNv4 peering.As you can see under R1 and XR2,the only vpnv4 peering they have is with their local CE(R5 and R6).Is it safe to say that the solution provided in WB is not complete or correct ??

    R1

    router bgp 65001
    !
    ! Cluster ID must be unique between R1 and XR2
    ! since they are both route reflectors in the same AS
    !
    no bgp cluster-id 65001
    neighbor 10.0.0.5 update-source Loopback0
    neighbor 10.0.0.20 update-source Loopback0

    address-family vpnv4
    neighbor 10.0.0.5 route-reflector-client
    exit-address-family
    !
    address-family ipv4 vrf

    XR2

    neighbor 10.0.0.6
    no address-family ipv4 unicast
    address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
    !
    address-family vpnv4 unicast
    route-reflector-client
    !
    neighbor 10.8.20.8
    no address-family ipv4 unicast
    address-family ipv4 labeled-unicast
    route-policy PASS in
    route-policy PASS out

     

     

     

  • Is there not a preconfigured peering between 1 and 20?

  • You´re right Jeff,there is a pre-configured vpnv4 peering between R1 and R20.I´ll give it a another try.Many thanks for your help guys.

  • @USHA

    I understand your frustration first of all visualize scenario,
    your first question why inter-as vpnv4  peerings between routers R1, R5, XR2 and R6  by full mesh or with RR ?

     

    You question yourself 
    who are this routers I mean in mpls vpn scenario what are the roles of
    this routers, actually they are the CEs of core AS and PEs for their l3vpns
    customers , so for l3vpns we need vpnv4 peerings between PEs to exchange
    customers routes over mpls enabled core. Is this clear all 

Sign In or Register to comment.