The MPLS-OPS Archive

["alok" <alok.dube@apara.com>]

but then thats as good as an L3VPN??
why bother abt it at all then??

what i wanna know is can L2VPN be implemented (non ip traffic) to achieve
this result?
-rgds
a
----- Original Message -----
From: Guy Davies <Guy.Davies@telindus.co.uk>
To: 'alok' <alok.dube@apara.com>; <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 6:32 PM
Subject: RE: [MPLS-OPS]: Re: L2VPN



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Yes.  This is certainly possible using JUNOS (from 5.3 I think).  It
is known in JUNOSspeak as translational cross connect (tcc).  I'm not
sure about other vendors.  You can currently interoperate any
combination of ATM (P2P), FR (P2P), PPP and Cisco-HDLC.  There is a
downside to this functionality.  You can only carry IP traffic over
such a VPN.

Regards,

Guy

> -----Original Message-----
> From: alok [mailto:alok.dube@apara.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 1:53 PM
> To: mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
> Subject: [MPLS-OPS]: Re: L2VPN
>
>
> ...i ran this query sometime back...
>
> has anyone seen an implementation where the 2 remote ends are
> of different
> types..? like ATM on one end and FR on the other?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: alok <alok.dube@apara.com>
> To: <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:58 PM
> Subject: Re: L2VPN
>
>
> ...as an extension, why shud the encap even be the same at all?
> i cud have FR on one end and ATM on the other...?
>
> am i misinterpreting the draft ?
>
> -rgds
> Alok
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: alok <alok.dube@apara.com>
> To: <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 9:53 PM
> Subject: L2VPN
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> was just reading
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kompella-ppvpn-l2vpn-02.tx
> t
>
> does any one have any idea why the fr encap etc should be a
> cross connect?
>
> why cant we simply let DLCIs change across locations...
>
> what i mean is this:
>
> Site -A connects to PE via some FR provider to go to Site B..
> who comes into
> my MPLS network.....
>
> he gives site A a DLCI to connect him from A to B.
>
> now the FR provider on the other end of the MPLS VPN cant use
> the same DLCI
> number....( he has used it etc)
>
> why cant i associate this with another DLCI and send it across....
>
> essentially if the CE-id is the distinguisher... why can i
> simply "simulate"
> a huge FR network??? rather than a huge FR switch?
>
> its upto me how to associate the CE-id with the DLCI..... but why
> not support "encap-fr" instead of "encap-fr-ccc"?
>
> same for ATM...
>
> any ideas?
>
> -rgds
> Alok
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------
> The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
> Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.1

iQA/AwUBPX3tV43dwu/Ss2PCEQLlEwCfbUwY0BRbmgOLX9YiDQbTOfXaalQAoIB+
5QXRCY98QSrlOtXHnDaMrwA7
=QQQW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



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