The MPLS-OPS Archive

[sthaug@nethelp.no]

> The real problem with VPLS lies not in the technology but the actual
> SLA that you can offer the customer.  Just ask Cisco the question
> and all you get back is "we would never recommend a vpls solution
> due to the SLA issues".  This is the main reason Cisco are very slow
> to market with VPLS as they don't actually belive there is a "real"
> requirement for it.

It is not obvious to me that VPLS has SLA problems. Also, there are
other vendors than Cisco (for instance Juniper), with more mature VPLS
solutions.

> Please don't mix this up with L2vpn as this is completely different.
> Point to point L2vpns (especially ethernet) are at the moment the
> hot sell for my company.  In the space of 1 year we have sold
> hundreds of these types of links throughout the whole of Britain.

Well, I work for a company that also sells both point to point *and*
point to multipoint L2. As far as we can see, there's a market for
both types of solutions. 

> If the customer wants any-any connectivity I would always push them
> down the L3VPN solution.  I would also offer them OSPF, RIPv2 or
> EIGRP (something which our company differs on other SP's).

I would also in most cases push L3 solutions - mostly because I find
them easier to debug. But there's definitely a market for L2 point to
multipoint.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no

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