The MPLS-OPS Archive

[Christopher Lewis <chrlewis@cisco.com>]

My last comments on this whole thread.

If the SP wants customer implemented IPSec VPNs as its VPN strategy, as it 
has zero impact on its core, then zero is exactly what it gets in terms of 
VPN revenue. We have already seen voice go to near free, data connections 
will follow. Competing purely on price for transport only services is going 
to get tough, probably room for 2 or 3 BIG ones in the end. How many 
service providers will be able to get the economies of scale that UUNET 
does? The rest have to look at generating revenue from services. Providing 
outsourced VPN services is a big and quickly growing market, ignoring it 
means lost revenue.

Personally I don't see any discussion of IPSec better than MPLS, better 
than virtual router, or any combination of that set, to have any value. As 
stated many times  on this alias, they are all different and each are 
appropriate for different situations. Cisco can offer all three, I've even 
steered some customers towards our VPN5000, that has VR capability when 
they thought they wanted MPLS, purely because for their situation the VR 
solution made more sense.

Amen,

Chris

At 03:57 PM 3/17/2001, Danny McPherson wrote:

> > ...sure.  But is IPSec at the CE more scalable than MPLS VPN at the
> > PE?
>
>As far as the SP is concerned, absolutely!
>
> > So you acknowledge that there are other providers who don't speak up,
> > but assume they all agree with you? :)
>
>Not at all.  As a matter of fact, I'm quite certain many
>have taken the MPLS VPN pill.
>
>-danny
>
>-------
>The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
>Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml