From my experience, you are probably just asking the EX4200 to do more than it was made to do. That is a lot of CCC circuits to reallocate on the fly, especially for a smaller device. You may me able to reduce convergence time by making your LSP's static with a standby secondary so the path is

Hi dave, Our setup was a dual ring with two devices common to both rings. It used a full mesh of LSP's but the majority of traffic was L3VPN. There were some VPLS connections as well, maybe a total of 30 VLAN's. LSP's were set up with static path's the short way around the ring and a standby active secondary path the long way around. Convergence time for a failure on either ring was barely noticable. I am no longer with that organization so I can't get access to the gear anymore :( preconfigured when a failover occurs, the only problem with this is the scalability gets poor quickly as you start to add devices. Erik On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 8:39 AM, daveb <spike@zitomedia.net> wrote:

Hi, I saw your response on NANOG and have a couple questions for you if you don't mind. I'm doing a similar design with MPLS (OSPF/RSVP) on EX4200s in a 10GE ring, mainly for 'ccc' circuits and IP connectivity. The EX4200 serves both the P and PE functions and some of my rings may be as large as 30 devices.

In my informal lab test with just 4 EXs in a ring, the convergence time (optomized with FRR, path protection and 50ms BDF) for 1 ccc circuit was 300ms and with 200 ccc circuits it was several seconds, and 800 kills the box. I can't imaging what it would be like with 20 or 30 device in the ring.

I was just wondering if you've doen similar testing with the MX as far as scaling. I'm assuming the EX4200 just isn't up to the task but I'm also concerned that ring topologies are problematic for re-routing LSPs. I can test to find the optimum/maximum number of allowable ccc circuits with 4 devices in the ring but I have no way or testing with 20 or 30 so I'm really trying to determine how much worse convergence is with more devices vs number of LSPs.

Thanks, Dave Bernardi

At 12:00 AM 9/4/2009, Erik Schmersal wrote:

...

...

Not only can they, it's done quite frequently. I just completed a

...

deployment of seven Juniper MX series routers in a dual ring configuration, all acting as combination P/PE devices for a state government WAN backbone. Works like a charm.

Erik

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Serge Vautour <sergevautour@yahoo.ca wrote:

...

Hello,

I'm pretty confident that a router can be used to perform P & PE functions simultaneously. What about from a best practice perspective? Is this something that should be completely avoided? Why? We're considering doing this as a temporary workaround but we all know temporary usually lasts a long time. I'd like to know what kind of mess awaits if we let this one go.

Thanks, Serge

---

...

...

...

Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites. Download it now http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.