The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2002-Aug> msg00135



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Fwd: Re: Re: Orchestream & Cisco's VPNSC comparison

  • From: Roger Clark Williams <rogerw@nordlink.com>
  • Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 12:29:40 -0400
  • Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 16:43:59 -0400
  • To: MPLS-ops Mailing List <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
  • X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by host.secure4-hosting.net id g7UJex003563
  • X-Sender: rogerw@together.net@207.69.200.148

It is my understanding that there is an outside company, working with Cisco 
support, that will release either a plug-in to, or complete version of, 
VPNSC 2.2 that supports both Juniper and Unisphere as well as the growing 
line of supported Cisco gear. Since I don't know whether the release has 
been officially announced  I can't mention the company by name. I do not 
know what specific platforms will be supported.

Roger Williams


>Resent-Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 09:23:21 -0400
>X-Authentication-Warning: host.secure4-hosting.net: mplsrc12 set sender to 
>mpls-ops-request@mplsrc.com using -f
>Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 14:58:44 +0200 (CEST)
>From: Peter Marenbach <pmarenbach@yahoo.de>
>Subject: Re: Re: [MPLS-OPS]: Orchestream & Cisco's VPNSC comparison
>To: Tom Zingale <tomz@cisco.com>, mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
>Resent-From: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
>X-Mailing-List: <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com> archive/latest/4434
>X-Loop: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
>Resent-Sender: mpls-ops-request@mplsrc.com
>
>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

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