Category: MPLS VPN

Long long time ago¹, in an ancient town far far away², an old-school networking Jeddi³ was driving us toward a convent⁴ where we had an SDN workshop⁵. While we were stuck in the morning traffic jam, an enthusiastic engineer sitting beside me wanted to know my opinion about per-prefix and per-VRF MPLS/VPN label allocation.

At that time, I had lived in a comfortable Cisco IOS bubble for way too long, so my answer was along the lines of “Say what???” Nicola Modena⁶ quickly expanded my horizons, and I said, “Gee, I have to write a blog post about that!” As you can see, it took me over a decade.

Hub-and-spoke topology is by far the most complex topology I’ve ever encountered in the MPLS/VPN (and now EVPN) world. It’s used when you want to push all the traffic between sites attached to a VPN (spokes) through a central site (hub), for example, when using a central firewall.

You get the following diagram when you model the traffic flow requirements with VRFs. The forward traffic uses light yellow arrows, and the return traffic uses dark orange ones.

One of my readers was building a private MPLS/VPN backbone and wondered whether they should use their public AS number or a private AS number for the backbone. Usually, it doesn’t matter; the deciding point was the way they want to connect to the public Internet:

We also plan to peer with multiple external ISPs to advertise our public IP space not directly from our PE routers but from dedicated Internet Routers, adding a firewall between our PEs and external Internet routers.

They could either run BGP between the PE routers, firewall, and WAN routers (see BGP as High-Availability Protocol for more details) or run BGP across a bump-in-the-wire firewall:

Two week ago I described how to create a simple VRF Lite lab with netlab VRF configuration module. Adding MPLS/VPN to the mix and creating a full-blown MPLS/VPN lab is a piece of cake. In this blog post we’ll build a simple topology with two VRFs (red and blue) and two PE-routers:

I always found VRF lab setups a chore. On top of the usual IPAM tasks you have to create VRFs, assign route targets and route distinguishers, do that on every PE-router in your lab… before you can start working on interesting things.

I tried to remove as much friction as I could with the netlab VRF configuration module – let me walk you through a few simple examples¹ which will also serve to illustrate the VRF configuration differences between Cisco IOS and Arista EOS.

netlab release 1.2.0 adds full-blown MPLS and MPLS/VPN support:

• VRF definitions and layer-3 VRFs
• VRF-aware OSPF, IS-IS and BGP
• Traditional MPLS with LDP (SR-MPLS was already available)
• BGP Labeled Unicast
• MPLS/VPN: VPNv4 and VPNv6 address family support

It’s never been easier to build full-blown MPLS/VPN labs ;)… if you’re OK with using Cisco IOS or Arista EOS. Please feel free to submit a PR to add support for other platforms.

You might want to start with the VRF tutorial to see how simple it is to define VRFs, and follow the installation guide to set up your lab – if you’re semi-fluent in Linux, the easiest option would be to run Arista cEOS.

Henk Smit made the following claim in one of his comments:

I think BGP-MPLS-VPNs are over-complicated. And you don’t get enough return for that extra complexity.

TL&DR: He’s right (and I just violated Betteridge’s law of headlines)

The history of how we got to the current morass might be interesting for engineers who want to look behind the curtain, so here we go…

We had the usual gloomy December weather during the end-of-year holidays, and together with the partial lockdown (with confusing ever-changing rules only someone in Balkans could dream up) it managed to put me in OCD mood… and so I decided to remove broken links from the old blog posts.

While doing that I figured out how fragile our industry is – I encountered a graveyard of ideas and products that would make Google proud. Some of those blog posts were removed, I left others intact because they still have some technical merits, and I made sure to write sarcastic update notices on product-focused ones. Consider those comments Easter eggs… now go and find them ;))

Remember how earlier releases of Nexus-OS started dropping configuration commands if you were typing them too quickly (and how it was declared a feature ;)?

Mark Fergusson had a similar experience on Cisco IOS. All he wanted to do was to use Ansible to configure a VRF, an interface in the VRF, and OSPF routing process on Cisco CSR 1000v running software release 15.5(3).

Here’s what he was trying to deploy. Looks like a configuration straight out of an MPLS book, right?

Steve Krause created a full-blown network services deployment solution, including post-deployment validation of OSPF and BGP routing, while attending Building Network Automation Solutions online course (I prefer course attendees working on real-life problems instead of artificial ones).

Hope you’ll enjoy exploring it ;)

Tiziano Tofoni wrote a lengthy comment on my EVPN in small data center fabrics blog post continuing the excellent discussion we started over a beer last October. Today, I’ll address the first part:

I think that EVPN is an excellent standard for those who love Layer 2 (L2) services; we may say that it is an evolution of the implementation of the VPLS service, which addresses some limits in the original standard (RFCs 4761 and 4762).

I might be missing something, but in my opinion, there’s no similarity between EVPN and VPLS (apart from the fact that they’re trying to solve the same problem).

I always encourage the students attending the Building Network Automation Solutions online course to create solutions for problems they’re facing in their networks instead of wasting time with vanilla hands-on assignments.

Francois Herbet took the advice literally and decided to create a solution that would configure PE-routers and create full-blown device configurations for CE-routers.

Here’s a question I got on one of my ancient blog posts:

How many OSPF process ID can be used in a single VRF instance?

Seriously? You have to ask that? OK, maybe the question isn’t as simple as it looks. It could be understood as:

Over a month ago I decided to create a lab network to figure out how to solve an interesting Inter-AS MPLS/VPN routing challenge. Instead of configuring half a dozen routers I decided to develop a fully-automated deployment because it will make my life easier.

I finally got to a point where OSPF, LDP, BGP (IPv4 and VPNv4) and MPLS/VPN configurations are created, deployed and verified automatically.

I got into an interesting discussion with Johannes Luther on the need for VRFs and he wrote:

If VRF = L3 virtualization technologies, then I saw that link. However, VRFs are again just a tiny piece of the whole story.

Of course he’s right, but it turns out that VRFs are the fundamental building block of most L3 virtualization technologies using a shared infrastructure.