Hi
Every scenario I see with Junos MC-LAG requires a ICL link and the MC-AE interface has to be L2. If you want L3 you need to back this off to a irb interface.
I have the situation where I need to achieve the following:
multiple downstream devices, each using the same two vlan IDs. but each ae interface uses a different L3 subnet on vlans.
example:
client 1:
vlan 10 = 10.1.1.2/30
vlan 20 = 10.2.1.2/30
client 2:
vlan 10 = 10.1.1.6/30
vlan 20 = 10.2.1.6/30
on my MC-LAG peers I want to put all vlan 10 interfaces into one L3VPN and all vlan 20 interfaces into another L3VPN.
on my cisco boxes I have mc-lag in active/standby and the following type of config:
int gi1
lacp fast
bundle id AAA active
int gi1.10
vrf forwarding L3VPN-A
ipv4 address 10.1.1.2/30
int gi1.20
vrf forwarding L3VPN-B
ipv4 address 10.2.1.2/30
int gi2
lacp fast
bundle id BBB active
int gi2.10
vrf forwarding L3VPN-A
ipv4 address 10.1.1.6/30
int gi1.20
vrf forwarding L3VPN-B
ipv4 address 10.2.1.6/30
now as the Cisco is running active/standby only the active router is announcing the routes into the VRF.
on my Junos MX platforms I am wondering if I can do the same.
all examples seem to indicate I need to backoff the L3 interfaces onto IRBs. This for me means the following complications:
1. having to dedicate a VLAN per downlink vlan so that I can have the unique /30 subnets.
2. having to have vlan rewrites from the internal vlans down to the standardised vlans facing the clients.
3. having to place all of those internal vlans onto the ICL interface.
I can understand that if I wanted an active/active setup with state sync etc I may need to do these tricks, but is it needed for active/standby?
many thanks
#mx#mc-lag#active#L3unicast#standby