Re: [Splitting ARIN assignment] MPLS VPNv4, iBGP, split announce

["Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists () gmail com>]

On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 5:34 PM, Greg VILLAIN <nanog () grrrrreg net> wrote:

> I have an equivalent dilemma: I'm of course well educated about not
> de-aggregating and would like, as much as possible, to avoid it.
> I'm trying to build a small-bandwidth core across an MPLS VPN, and I haven't
> been able to get an answer from the suppliers I'm auditing (even big
> ones...) although I'm pretty sure I can do it.
>
> Basically, the way I see it is that it would only be equivalent to a
> situation where hosts on my local LANs had tcp179 sessions across the VPN -
> but yet some (quite big players, not mentioning them though) are saying it
> would conflict with their instance of MP-BGP used for the VPN-v4. I

nonsense... traffic from CE to CE isn't visible to the PE nor P
routers aside from labelled packets... How else would people be able
to sell CCC circuits across MPLS networks that are used for Internet
Connectivity and have BGP from CE to PE (where the ce/pe link is the
CCC link)

I think the folks you are chatting with at the providers are not
understanding your question(s) or their network(s).

-Chris