352-001 · Question #18
A customer is using a service provider to provide a WAN backbone for a 30-site network. In establishing the network, the customer must work within these constraints: - The customer has a self-managed
The correct answer is A. Configure static GRE tunnels and run the MPLS and multicast VPN inside these GRE tunnels.. When a VPLS provider backbone does not support PIM snooping, encapsulating MPLS and multicast VPN traffic inside GRE tunnels treats the WAN as a point-to-point unicast fabric, preventing multicast from being flooded to all sites.
Question
A customer is using a service provider to provide a WAN backbone for a 30-site network. In establishing the network, the customer must work within these constraints:
- The customer has a self-managed MPLS backbone.
- The VPLS WAN backbone of the service provider does not support PIM
snooping.
- Multicast VPN must be used for multicast support inside some VRFs.
What can the customer do so that multicast traffic is NOT flooded to all sites?
Options
- AConfigure static GRE tunnels and run the MPLS and multicast VPN inside these GRE tunnels.
- BUse Label Switched Multicast for the multicast transport.
- CUse PIM-SSM as the multicast routing protocol with IETF Rosen Draft multicast VPN.
- DConfigure a static mapping between multicast addresses and MAC addresses.
- EUse GET VPN to encrypt the multicast packets inside the WAN.
How the community answered
(37 responses)- A68% (25)
- B3% (1)
- C5% (2)
- D8% (3)
- E16% (6)
Why each option
When a VPLS provider backbone does not support PIM snooping, encapsulating MPLS and multicast VPN traffic inside GRE tunnels treats the WAN as a point-to-point unicast fabric, preventing multicast from being flooded to all sites.
Configuring static GRE tunnels over the VPLS backbone allows the customer to run its self-managed MPLS network inside those tunnels, so multicast VPN traffic is encapsulated as unicast GRE packets before entering the provider network. Because the provider only sees unicast GRE traffic, it routes rather than floods the packets, and multicast replication decisions remain under the customer's control within the MPLS/mVPN domain.
Label Switched Multicast using mLDP or RSVP-TE P2MP requires multicast-capable label switching in the provider core, which is not available in a VPLS-only backbone.
PIM-SSM with IETF Rosen Draft mVPN still relies on the provider network to replicate multicast traffic selectively, which requires PIM snooping support that the VPLS backbone explicitly lacks.
Configuring static multicast-to-MAC address mappings only affects local Layer 2 flooding decisions on a switch and does not control how the VPLS provider replicates multicast frames across the WAN.
GET VPN encrypts traffic but does not change how the VPLS provider handles multicast replication, so multicast packets would still be flooded to all VPLS sites.
Concept tested: GRE tunneling to contain multicast in VPLS WAN
Source: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/ipmulti_vpn/configuration/xe-16/imc-vpn-xe-16-book/imc-mvpn-overview.html
Topics
Community Discussion
No community discussion yet for this question.