can anyone give practical differences between VRF and VR ?
What can be done using VRF and can't be in VR ?
that's a question i would like to get answer to myself.
I believe a VRF is more used for L2/L3 VPNs and the like, as it requires you to configure a Route Target and Route Distinguisher
a Virtual Router is just a separate routing table
if someone has more insight please feel free -- that's my very basic understanding of them 🙂
Wimclend, you've got it precisely
VRF is used in an MPLS/VPN architecture like you said and virtual router is used to have separate routing table in the other cases (without MPLS core)
@Loup2 wrote:Wimclend, you've got it precisely VRF is used in an MPLS/VPN architecture like you said and virtual router is used to have separate routing table in the other cases (without MPLS core) That's all
That's a very concise answer
There are more subtle differences which are derived from this fact above:
1/ OSPF inside VRF automatically sets DN-bit and route-tag whereas OSPF inside VR does not
2/ VRF automatically imports MP-BGP routes with matching route-target, VR does not
3/ usually packets from the core enter VRF based on VPN label whereas to put packets from inet.0 into VR you need to explicitly configure FBF or logical-tunnel(s) between inet.0 and VR
thanks for the replies
Like others said VRF is used with MPLS. To map the logic to cisco's wording, virtual-router is like vrf-lite.