ENCOR - LISP and VXLAN 

Earlier jeremy was my favourite then i saw Jeffa videos this man is just from another dimension

agreed

no the Site to Site(VPN Tunnels) replaced the MPLS old day internet was not fast enough they have to use MPLS

yes. close to million, not billion

I use Corel Painter for the chalkboard, but any art program would work fine. I have a Wacom tablet for my hardware, and I record with OBS and/or Streamlabs depending on whether it's a live stream or not. Thanks!

Each legacy VLAN will need to tie into a VXLAN ID. The VXLAN will carry that L2 traffic through the fabric to wherever it needs to go. We can think of VXLAN as a 'glue' that connects legacy VLANs to one another through the L3 domain. HTH!

LISP doesn't directly influence the global Internet routing table. Instead, it makes it so only certain SP routers need to store the entire table. By leveraging LISP, the edge SP routers will encapsulate traffic such that the core routers can have a much smaller routing table, only focusing on how to get to the other side of the domain. I hope that helps!

@@KishSquared ❤️❤️❤️

@@nicktucker3437 I've only seen DMVPN used across WANs, not on campuses. Mostly in this context I was referring to PtP tunnels as well. SDNs make the quick creation and teardown of tunnels a trivial task.

@@KishSquared makes sense..haven't seen many campus networks bur Id preume they are more flat than WAN stuff, other times I've seen DMVPN is trying to replicate Frame Relay type stuff in labbing(not even sure we can still use ODR for such for autoconfig)

Thanks for the correction! Guess we should just set the MTU and be done with it, then. Will save everyone headaches that way.

​@@KishSquared Near as I can tell in my labbing thus far, if the packet is less than the set MTU on the tunnel, but greater than what the physical egress interface can accommodate with the additional headers, the egress interface will fragment even if the df-bit is set in the original ip header, because it's not set in the gre outer ip header. But I might be a little unclear what it all means in the big picture. Unless the df-bit is set, and unless I am misunderstanding, the packet is going to arrive at the destination fragmented in both cases, that is, if the packet is larger than the tunnel mtu the tunnel interface performs the fragmentation, and if it's smaller than the tunnel mtu but too big for the physical interface, the physical interface fragments, but in both cases, it's up to the receiving host to put it back together? and notify the sender to reduce packet size? So if I am drawing the correct conclusion, setting the tunnel MTU correctly is all about respecting the df-bit? Your challenge did lead to some insights not previously considered by me, thank you!!

Thanks for the comment! I use Corel Painter for the background, but any art program would suffice. I'm using OBS to record the screen while I write.

@@KishSquared Thanks for your reply. The chalk-board look and feel within the Corel Painter gives a nice old school touch. Very nice!! Can be that I like this, since I am also little bit begin to be older :-) Keep up this nice detailed video's. Like that very much!!

Good question! Entries are cleared after 24 hours of inactivity.

Yes that's correct, the PxTR is going to take routes from the LISP domain and advertise them to the non-LISP domain, via BGP or even EIGRP/OSPF. Gotta let the rest of the world know where the LISP routes are!

Or maybe lisp and vxlan are PETR and re-PETR. lol

They are very different, actually! MPLS reduces multiple VRF/routing domains to a common method of quickly switching via labels. LISP reduces the routing table sizes within a domain and thereby reduces lookup latency. They work great together!

@@KishSquared but if the edge routers need to have the full routing table to register to MS/MR and the Core switch MPLS labels, what is the advantage of having them together?