[192669] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: OSPF vs ISIS - Which do you prefer & why?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Fri Nov 11 05:20:56 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
To: Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com>, nanog@nanog.org
From: Mark Tinka <mark.tinka@seacom.mu>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 12:20:49 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAPkb-7CPKhTHetUm2v+jK=TWsg33czpY37qqFVWaNYAYgfC-_A@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
On 11/Nov/16 12:07, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> No filters. There are just no routes that will take a network packet that
> arrive on an interface in VRF internet and move it to an interface in VRF
> default without adding a MPLS header to mark the VRF. With the MPLS header
> the packet type is no longer IPv4 but MPLS.
>
> Therefore there is no way you from the internet or from a customer link can
> even attempt to inject packets that would be received by the OSPF process.
> Since we use 10.0.0.0/8 and our vrf internet has no such route, you would
> just get no route to host if you tried.
Good for you.
We don't run the whole "Internet in a VRF" architecture (too many moving
parts), so not having our IGP being exposed to IP helps :-).
Mark.
