RARE user and assistance email list

[Kaliraj Vairavakkalai <>]

> interface tunnel1
>    tunnel destination r5
>    tunnel mode rsvp-te
>    vrf forwarding red

 

Ok, I like this. This is part of the solution.

 

Is there some other configuration that tells that ibgp-routes received with a

certain community resolve their nexthop using tunnels in vrf red? i.e. resolution-scheme.

 

That’ll complete colorful resolution. :)

 

Thanks

Kaliraj

From: mc36 <>
Date: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 11:00 PM
To: Kaliraj Vairavakkalai <>, <>, Krzysztof Szarkowicz <>, Simon Leinen <>, Ivana Golub <>, Frédéric LOUI <>
Cc: Natrajan Venkataraman <>, Reshma Das <>, <>
Subject: Re: [freertr] [RARE-users] EANTC - BGP CT - Juniper-FreeRTR

[External Email. Be cautious of content]


well i need to test this as a whole, i have question marks.... i'll keep you posted....

On 2/15/23 07:57, mc36 wrote:
> but well, the rsvp-te tunnel creation will be manual like in ciscos, so on r5 you'll have to do something like
>
> interface tunnel1
>    tunnel destination r5
>    tunnel mode rsvp-te
>    vrf forwarding red
>
> interface tunnel2
>    tunnel destination r6
>    tunnel mode rsvp-te
>    vrf forwarding blue
>
> interface toward-r6
>    vrf forwarding red
>
> interface toward-r7
>    vrf forwarding blue
>
> router bgp 123
>    afi-color red redistribute connected
>    afi-color blue redistribute connected
>    neighbor address-of-r4 address-family ctp
>
>
>
>
>
> On 2/15/23 07:49, mc36 wrote:
>> hi,
>> let's have a different topology to answer your question:
>>
>>     r1                                 r6     <----- red row
>>        > r3---r4---r5 <
>>     r2                                 r7     <----- blue row
>>
>> r1 and r2 are cpes in vpnv4/vpnv6 vrfs of r3,
>> r3-r4 will have two rsvp-te tunels and vpnv4/vpnv6 ibgp,
>> r4-r5 will have a single bgp-ct
>> and r6 and r7 are cpes in vpnv4/vpnv6 vrfs of v5
>>
>> so this doable, but i don't have a complete test case for it, just in pieces,
>> but i can quickly write you this topology as a test if that helps?
>> br,
>> cs
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/15/23 07:42, Kaliraj Vairavakkalai wrote:
>>>> rare/freertr used the neighbor 1.1.1.1 address-family knob whta controls, but the safis are similarly exclusive, only one of them is accepted:
>>>
>>> Yea, we noticed that during last hackathon. that     s ok, we can work with that.
>>>
>>> But my main question was this:
>>>
>>> Lets say there are two RSVP-TE-Tunnels (red, blue) between r1 to r2.
>>>
>>>>    red                                 red---r5
>>>> r0-->r1====r2<--r4
>>>> blue                                 blue
>>>
>>>> so in the above topology we can separate the two colors while using a single link in between r1 and r2 with 1 bgp-ct session...
>>>
>>> Can red bgp-ct routes put traffic on red-Tunnel. And blue-routes put traffic on blue-Tunnel?
>>>
>>> i.e. based on the mapping-community on the bgp-route, resolve bgp nexthop r2 over a red/blue-Tunnel.
>>>
>>> I thought that is the       Colorful resolution       functionality that arrived in spring. Sorry if I misunderstood. :)
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Kaliraj
>>>
>>> *From: *mc36 <>
>>> *Date: *Tuesday, February 14, 2023 at 10:11 PM
>>> *To: *Kaliraj Vairavakkalai <>, Krzysztof Szarkowicz <>, Simon Leinen <>, Ivana Golub
>>> <>, Fr   d   ric LOUI <>
>>> *Cc: *Natrajan Venkataraman <>, Reshma Das <>, <>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [freertr] [RARE-users] EANTC - BGP CT - Juniper-FreeRTR
>>>
>>> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>>>
>>>
>>>> (xr lifted this recently, whereas it's still true for xe and rare/freerouter)
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> c8000v-1(config)#router bgp 1
>>> c8000v-1(config-router)#address-family ipv4 unicast
>>> c8000v-1(config-router-af)#neighbor 1.1.1.1 send-label ?
>>>            explicit-null     Advertise Explicit Null label in place of Implicit Null
>>>            <cr>                                         <cr>
>>>
>>> c80000v-1(config-router-af)#neighbor 1.1.1.1 send-label
>>>
>>> so this knob is what "converts" this peering from ipv4 unicast to ipv4 labeled unicast, and obviously it's set or not... :)
>>>
>>> rare/freertr used the neighbor 1.1.1.1 address-family knob whta controls, but the safis are similarly exclusive, only one of them is accepted:
>>>
>>> sid#configure
>>> sid(cfg)#router bgp4 123 vrf v3
>>> sid(cfg-rtr)#neighbor 1.1.1.1 remote-as 321
>>> sid(cfg-rtr)#neighbor 1.1.1.1 address-family unicast labeled
>>> sid(cfg-rtr)#show running-config this
>>> router bgp4 123 vrf v3
>>>        neighbor 1.1.1.1 remote-as 321
>>>        neighbor 1.1.1.1 address-family labeled
>>>        exit
>>> !
>>>
>>> sid(cfg-rtr)#
>>>
>>>
>>> Juniper Business Use Only
>>>
>>
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
>> View/Reply Online (#1071): https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.io/g/freertr/message/1071__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!A0uQJLhNSHyHJNeTSXDuCuhPIBmYEHplMlAUsHzA7ojCDD8o9jev8ZpbINs5-MKSwY_ggq81$
>> Mute This Topic: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.io/mt/96978256/6006518__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!A0uQJLhNSHyHJNeTSXDuCuhPIBmYEHplMlAUsHzA7ojCDD8o9jev8ZpbINs5-MKSwdQ9zCGz$
>> Group Owner:
>> Unsubscribe: https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://groups.io/g/freertr/unsub__;!!NEt6yMaO-gk!A0uQJLhNSHyHJNeTSXDuCuhPIBmYEHplMlAUsHzA7ojCDD8o9jev8ZpbINs5-MKSwXbLkK0A$  []
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>

Juniper Business Use Only