The MPLS-OPS Archive

[Peter Marenbach <pmarenbach@yahoo.de>]

Tom,

sorry for the delay. I'm not checking this mailbox too
often.

> I work at Cisco with VPNSC.  I would be interested
> in understanding what
> version of VPNSC you are testing ?

Version 2.0.0.7.
 
> >we did not really a detailed comparison of both
> >systems, but I had at least a look at both. The
> short
> >summary is: the advantage of VPNSC is that it is
> >cheaper, the advantage of Orchestream is that it is
> >the better software.
> >
> >The most often mentioned advantage of Orchestream
> is
> >that it supports multiple platforms.
> 
> VPNSC does have multi-vendor support today.

not in VPNSC 2.0. I had a short look at the Release
Notes for 2.2. There support for Cisco PIX was
announced. This is new but not still Cisco. Which
other vendors does VPNSC support today. And what
version of VPNSC are you talking about "today".
 
> My impression is
> >that even if you have a Cisco only network, you
> will
> >benefit from the better internal data model
> >Orchestream implemented to be able to support
> >different vendors. I'm running VPNSC in a test
> >environment for half a year now and found that if
> >support of Cisco's own equipment is limited. E.g.
> it
> >supports only IOS routers.
> 
> Not sure why you think VPNSC for support for Cisco
> is limited ? VPNSC
> supports and tests all major IOS versions, cards and
> hardware for all
> MPLS/VPN enabled PE devices. On the CE side we
> support virtually every
> device cisco offers.

Just as an example: In 2.0 VPNSC does not support
dot1Q VLAN interfaces. Also, it does not support the
use of BRI interfaces for leased lines. 

>  There is no way to easiliy
> >integrte support for other targets such as a RADIUS
> >server needed for Cisco's virtual homegateway
> feature.
> >Also, if you want to set special parameters like
> UBR
> >bandwidth for ATM sub-interfaces, this is extremly
> >difficult with VPNSC.
>  Finally, VPNSC relies on IMHO
> >rather stange naming conventions, which make it
> >difficult for humans to understand a configuration
> >implemented by the system.
> 
> 
> If you want to talk offline on specifics of what you
> think we need to change
> this would be appreciated.
>
> >I would like to know if there are any productive
> >implementaions of VPNSC. I heard that multiple
> >providers started implementing VPNSC, but replaced
> the
> >system by Orchestream before actually putting it
> into
> >production.
> 
> VPNSC has been sold in over 100 customers worldwide
> today with many major
> implentations today.  Actually VPNSC is deployed in
> some of Cisco's largest
> MPLS/VPN customers.

I know, that VPNSC was sold to may, many customers.
But this does not mean that they are happy with the
system nor that they actually use it in production. In
many cases VPNSC comes as add-on to the order of Cisco
hardware when providers are building up their MPLS-VPN
infrastructure. So having VPNSC does not mean using it
(as for my company).

Regards,
Peter

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Möchten Sie mit einem Gruß antworten? http://grusskarten.yahoo.de

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